My Samsung Galaxy S4. Too Old Yet?

Verizon is nagging me to upgrade my phone to a Galaxy S7. But I haven't even learned all about my S4 yet. This video shows a bunch of things it can do, several of which I didn't know:



I'm sure the S7 has it's charms, but the S4 is more than filling my needs, and it's paid for, which means I'll be sticking with it for a while yet. Probably at least until I've got it all figured out ;-)

Also See:

Galaxy S 4 Camera: Everything You Need To Know

25 Samsung Galaxy S4 Tips and Tricks in Under 10 minutes!
 

"Creepy" Robot Receptionist?

Yeah, kinda. Sorta. In a way. Or not. What do you think?:

Does this “humanlike” robot receptionist make you feel welcome or creeped out?

From a distance, Nadine looks like a very normal middle-aged woman, with a sensible haircut and dress style, and who’s probably all caught up on Downton Abbey. But then you hear Nadine talk and move, and you notice something’s a bit off. Nadine is actually the construct of Nadia Thalmann, the director of the Institute for Media Innovation at Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. She’s a robot that’s meant to serve as a receptionist for the university.
Thalmann modeled the robot after herself, and said that, in the future, robots like Nadine will be commonplace, acting like physical manifestations of digital assistants like Apple’s Siri or Microsoft’s Cortana. “This is somewhat like a real companion that is always with you and conscious of what is happening,” Thalmann said in a release.

Nadine can hold a conversation with real humans, and will remember someone’s face the next time she sees him. She can even remember what she spoke about with the person the last time they met. NTU said in its release that Nadine’s mood will depend on the conversations she’s having with others, much like a human’s mood can change. There’s no word on what she’d do in a bad mood, though—hopefully she won’t be able to close pod bay doors, or commit murder. Perhaps when the robot uprising happens, we won’t even see it coming, as they’ll all look just like us. [...]

The article goes on to talk about how the evolution of these robots is likely to continue, as they get better and even become commonplace. Read the whole thing for photos, video, and many embedded links. Do watch the video, it's short. I have to admit it's the most life-like robot I've ever seen.

I said it was "kinda" creepy because it looks so life-like, yet is not alive, and I'm not used to that. Talking to "life-like" things. But I suppose if it becomes commonplace, one would get used to it as normal. But more than "kinda creepy", it's ... pretty darn kewl! Commander Data, here we come...

Here is another link to a similar robot by another scientist:

The highest-paid woman in America is working on robot clones and pigs with human DNA

[...] Rothblatt also explained how she hired a team of robotic scientists to create a robot that was a “mind clone” of her wife, Bina Aspen.

Starting with a “mindfile”—a digital database of a person’s mannerisms, personality, recollections, feelings, beliefs, attitudes, and values gleaned from social media, email, videos, and other sources—Rothblatt’s team created a robot that can converse, write Tweets, and even express human emotions such as jealousy and pain in ways that mimic the person she was modeled after.

When Bina’s mortal self dies, Rothblatt said the robot version of her wife will live on, making it possible for “our identity to begin to transcend our bodies.”

It sounds like science fiction until you see photos of the robot, see her tweet, and hear snippets from her conversations that made audience members gasp and chuckle nervously as they realized Rothblatt was talking about more than just an idea. [...]

Read the whole thing for embedded links and more. And get ready for the Brave New World. It's closer than you think.
     

Androids: Fantasy VS Reality

The fantasy Android:



But what is the reality of Artificial Intelligence? The harsh truth:

Supercomputer Takes 40 Minutes To Model 1 Second of Brain Activity

Despite rumors, the singularity, or point at which artificial intelligence can overtake human smarts, still isn't quite here. One of the world's most powerful supercomputers is still no match for the humble human brain, taking 40 minutes to replicate a single second of brain activity.

Researchers in Germany and Japan used K, the fourth-most powerful supercomputer in the world, to simulate brain activity. With more than 700,000 processor cores and 1.4 million gigabytes of RAM, K simulated the interplay of 1.73 billion nerve cells and more than 10 trillion synapses, or junctions between brain cells. Though that may sound like a lot of brain cells and connections, it represents just 1 percent of the human brain's network.

The long-term goal is to make computing so fast that it can simulate the mind— brain cell by brain cell— in real-time. That may be feasible by the end of the decade, researcher Markus Diesmann, of the University of Freiburg, told the Telegraph.

It "may be" feasible by the end of the decade? To catch up with one second of human brain activity? Even if it does, we're talking about a Super-Computer. It's a long way from the android brain in the video. And yes, computers are advancing very fast. But to catch up with a human brain, much less surpass it... it won't happen tomorrow.

     

Android 4.4 "KitKat" reduces fragmentation of the platform, emphasizing standalone apps

Android 4.4 KitKat Continues To Reduce Fragmentation Of The Platform Thanks To Google Play

With the release of Android 4.4 (codename KitKat, in an interesting marketing move with Nestle), Google has taken more control of the software stack of the mobile operating system, leaving less control in the hands of the networks and addressing the issue of fragmentation in Android.

This is not a new strategy from Google. Over the last year more and more services are becoming standalone apps in the distribution, rather than an integral part of the firmware. This means that the apps can be updated through Google Play, rather than waiting for a new version of the operating system slowly moving along the chain that stretches from Mountain View, to the handset manufactures, to the smartphone lines, and then to the carriers, before possibly being made available to the public.

Contrast that to the path that Google has for updating an app in Google Play. They simply push the updated app into the Google Play Store, and with countless Android handsets set to automatically update apps from the Play Store, then code will roll out across the ecosystem.

While many people will focus on the share of phones who have updated the firmware to the next ‘notable number’ in the Android, Google has partially sidestepped that process. There’s no longer a dependency on passing the network certification processes to roll out changes to the applications and many of the library features in Android, because they are no longer part of that package. They’re higher up the chain, and their update is completely under the remit of Google. [...]

Android 4.4 KitKat: Google's simpler, integrated operating system designed for every phone

Google Android 4.4 'Kitkat': seven things you need to know
     

Android VS iPad. Is Android Winning?

Looks like that may be the case:

Android Tablets Pushing Aside iPad: IDC
Influx of low-cost Android-based devices will tip the tablet market in Google's favor this year, says IDC.

[...] Android tablets may have a leg up on the Apple iPad and iPad Mini thanks to their lower price point. Devices such as the Asus Nexus 7, with its $199 price tag, are appealing when compared to more expensive Apple hardware. The iPad Mini, for example, starts at $329 and jumps up quickly if you add features such as LTE 4G or more storage. Consider, also, the recently announced Galaxy Note 8 from Samsung. This appealing 8-inch tablet brings many of the Note II smartphone's features up to tablet size at a price that still beats the iPad.

The Nexus 7, Galaxy Note 8 and other Android tablets will account for 48.8% of the 190.9 million tablets shipped during 2013 (about 93.6 million tablets). That's up from IDC's previous forecasts for the year, which were much lower at 41.5%.

At the same time, IDC said, Apple's share of the tablet market will slip from the 51% of shipments it held at the end of 2012 to about 46% of shipments (about 87.9 million) by the end of 2013.

That means Android-based tablets will outmatch the iPad for the first time, with 48.8% of the tablet market this year, compared to 46%. That will certainly sting Apple, as it defined the current tablet market with the iPad.

Android and Apple aren't the only players in the game, however. Believe it or not, Microsoft is going to make some noise in the tablet market this year, said IDC, thanks to Windows 8 (think Surface Pro) and Windows RT. Both of Microsoft's tablet platforms will steal share that would otherwise have gone to Apple or Google, but not everything is necessarily going well with Microsoft's tablet plans. [...]

But then there is also Samsung's own operating system, "Tizen":

Samsung's future is Tizen, not Android

[...] Up until now, everybody had assumed that Tizen would focus on the lower and middle end, with Android focussing on higher-end phones (and also low-end). This new statement by Samsung seems to contradict just that; Tizen will be on high-end devices.

Add all of this together and it becomes clear what Samsung is going for. The company wants to decrease its dependence on Google, and Tizen is the way they're going to do that. For most Samsung smartphone owners, TouchWiz is Android, and since Tizen could easily get a TouchWiz-like user interface, the average consumer wouldn't notice a thing. OpenMobile's Application Compatibility Layer takes care of the application situation, and will allow Android applications to run on Tizen unmodified.

In other words, since most Samsung users are familiar with TouchWiz and Android applications, Tizen should not provide them with any difficulties - yet, at the same time, it will give Samsung control over its own platform, independent from Google. It won't have to conform to Google's wishes, it won't have to deal with sudden code drops from the Android team - it can do what it wants.

Of course, this won't happen overnight; it'll be a gradual process that may take several years. I also highly doubt Samsung will drop Android altogether - most likely, Samsung's big sellers, top-of-the-line devices will run Tizen, while others will run Android. [...]

More choice. Good! Read more about the open-source Tizen OS here.
     

Google's New "Kindle Crusher", the Nexus 7

Google’s Nexus 7 Tablet Crushes Kindle

[...] Google (GOOG)’s new Nexus 7 is aimed directly at the Kindle Fire, the seven-inch color tablet that was the runaway hit of the last holiday season. The Nexus 7 obliterates every reason for buying the current Kindle, and sets a high bar for whatever Amazon comes up with to replace it.

The Nexus 7 is Google’s first foray into selling a tablet under its own brand. It’s currently available for pre-order from Google Play, the company’s online store, with customer deliveries expected to begin next week. It costs $199 for a model with eight gigabytes of storage, same as the Kindle, or $249 for 16 gigabytes.

The device is manufactured by Taiwan-based Asustek (2357), and Google chose its partner wisely. Asus makes some of the prettiest tablets and personal computers this side of Apple, and the Nexus 7 is as attractive and smooth as the Kindle Fire is chunky and clunky.

At 7.8 inches tall and 4.7 inches wide, the Nexus 7 is compact enough to slide into a jacket pocket. A rubbery, textured back makes it easy to grip. Like the Kindle Fire, it works only over a Wi-Fi connection; while the screens are the same size, the Nexus 7’s has a resolution of 1280 x 800 pixels, compared to the Kindle Fire’s 1024 x 600.

More and Better

The Google tablet also has a more powerful, quad-core processor from Nvidia (NVDA), twice the internal memory and better battery. At four-tenths of an inch thick and 12 ounces, it’s also thinner and 18 percent lighter.

Go down the list of standard tablet features, and the Nexus 7 wins every one. Camera? None for the Kindle; the Nexus has a front-facing camera and microphone for video calls.

Bluetooth? The Kindle doesn’t have it; the Nexus 7 does.

GPS? Yes on the Nexus, along with a newly-enhanced Google app that lets you save maps for use even when you’re offline. The Kindle has nothing like it. [...]

Read the whole thing for more details.

I had considered getting a Kindle, but many of the reader reviews I've read on Amazon.com have said that the latest Kindle model has been plagued by "Freezes", making it unreliable. I was really put off by the customer complaints.

The Nexus 7 sounds interesting, but I think I'll wait for more reviews. Thank goodness for competition.
     

Why 2010 was the "Year of the Linux Desktop"

This is probably the best argument I've read for it:

The Linux Desktop Came on Little Cat Feet

Somehow, some way, the year 2010 may have finally been the year of the Linux desktop -- but no one noticed. Maybe no one needed to. In 2010, smartphones got hot, and Android OS smartphones collectively overtook the iPhone in units sold. At the same time, Android tablets gained traction as popular alternatives to the iPad.

A subtle shift in the notion of what defines "desktop," and suddenly Linux emerges in anonymous glory -- leaving Microsoft (Nasdaq: MSFT) playing the silly (but familiar and perhaps a bit dangerous) role of catch-up. Looking back, could 2010 really be the year when Linux, in the form of Android, became the desktop?

What is a desktop anyway?

A distinction may be necessary. While I may make a case that 2010 was the year of the Linux desktop, I realize the form factor is different, and it's a little new. But computers evolve, and the point -- that the Linux-based Android is a major player in the user-interface world -- is not lost or any less relevant. More important is that in smartphones, Linux trumps Windows. (More data to follow when next of kin have been notified.)

Naysayers may argue that Android as a desktop is a stretch but, really, what does define a desktop? In the first place, "desktop" has always been a muddy metaphor. Seriously, who puts "wallpaper" on a desktop? Distilled to its essence, the computer desktop is an infrastructure providing end-user computing. In that context, smartphones (iOS and Android based) capably provide just that, and in some ways more than traditional desktops do.

Android and Desktop computing

Traditional desktop computing let users do their banking online, make travel arrangements, play games, listen to music, and communicate with friends and family. Android does too, but with some obvious and some nuanced benefits. [...]

The article goes on to take a detailed look at those benefits. Read the whole thing and have a look at what Linux success looks like.


Also see:

Has "Wintel" been replaced by "Quadroid"?

     

Has "Wintel" been replaced by "Quadroid"?

A case can be made for it. First, the Wintel monopoly is dying off, ironically from it's own practices:

HP is Wintel's latest victim

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- For nearly three decades, personal computer makers thrived by building their PCs around two key ingredients: Intel chips and Microsoft Windows.

It's an unprecedented success streak in the fast-changing tech market, where new technologies displace old ones in an eyeblink. But now, it looks like the "Wintel" party is finally winding down.

[...]

"The tablet effect is real," HP CEO Leo Apotheker said Thursday on a conference call with analysts. "Consumers are changing how they use PCs."

In the new "post-PC" era, razor-thin profits are no longer attractive.

"The PC business only returns a few points of margin. HP is really good, and they only return 5%," said Martin Reynolds, analyst at Gartner. "Staying in the PC business is relatively risky. Who knows where these things will go over the next few years?"

[...]

"I think what we're seeing -- what HP's move is really about -- is the aftermath of the Wintel strategy, in which you give all the profits to Intel and Microsoft," said Carl Howe, analyst at Yankee Group.

While companies like HP and Dell are getting by with single-digit margins in their PC businesses, Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500) is the fourth-most profitable company in the Fortune 500. Intel (INTC, Fortune 500) is 14th.

"Guess what? That model is driving them all out of business," Howe continued. "It has made companies like Apple look really smart. Wintel is falling apart."

HP would follow IBM's exit of the PC market -- albeit seven years later.

IBM's move is looking more and more prescient: When it sold its iconic PC business to Lenovo in 2004, IBM (IBM, Fortune 500) said it believed the PC market was commoditizing. It didn't want to play in a market with so little upside.

Even Microsoft appreciates the changing tide. It's planning for the post-PC era by developing a new version of Windows for tablet PCs, running on mobile chips designed by British company ARM (ARMH). That's also why it's fighting so hard to make Windows Phone work: Microsoft realizes it can't afford to be left out of the computing platform of the future.

So if we're really witnessing the "final collapse of the Silicon Valley PC era," as Howe suggested, who's next to go? [...]

Read the whole thing to find out. But don't just look at who's next to go; consider also, perhaps more importantly, who's next to come, and why:

Android and Qualcomm are the new Wintel

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Google's Android mobile operating system has been credited with saving struggling handset manufacturers, but it may ultimately be the thing that kills a number of them off.

Before Android came around, mobile devices typically had hardware integrated with custom operating software, which differentiated LG phones from Samsung phones from Motorola phones, and so on. No two devices from rival manufacturers were at all alike.

But now, for the first time ever in the wireless ecosystem, a standard platform is emerging: At least a dozen handset makers have brought to market more than 90 different smartphones that run Android, and more than three quarters of those handsets have Qualcomm chips embedded in them, according to a new study by consultancy PRTM.

The Qualcomm-Android standard, or "Quadroid" as PRTM calls it, is becoming a parallel to the Windows-Intel, or "Wintel," standard that developed in the 1990s.

Like with Wintel PCs, Quadroid devices' software and hardware is essentially a commodity -- they're very similar on every phone, making differentiation a difficult task. Form factor is still a battleground -- some people want keyboards, some don't -- but drop past the top-tier of the very newest devices and the distinctions are tiny. Kickstands, dual screens, very high resolution cameras and OLED touchscreens are among the features Quadroid smartphone makers are using to set themselves apart.

It was a problem that Wintel PC companies tried to solve -- mostly unsuccessfully -- with customizability (Dell), unique design (Alienware), and cow-print boxes (Gateway).

But Quadroid has an added wrinkle: Android is open source, meaning it's free for device manufacturers to use and manipulate. That makes the barrier to entry almost nil, opening the door to a number of no-name manufacturers to produce smartphones that compete with the big guys. Two years ago, no one had heard of HTC or Kyocera, LG had virtually no smartphone presence, and Motorola (MOT, Fortune 500) had been left for dead. Now they're at the industry's vanguard. [...]

So a whole bunch of new players have jumped in and are at the head of the new trends, where Microsoft and Intel have not been able to go... yet. They are rushing to catch up and cash in. Will they make it? Will the competition they face produce better products? And will it all end up again being just a few major companies dominating everything in the end? We shall see.
     

Is Google's Android OS the "Linux Desktop" that will challenge Microsoft?

There is a case to be made for it:

Android the real Linux desktop threat to Windows

[...] Aside from being an open source Linux distribution, which is already starting to gain traction in the mobile phones space, Android has the backing of Google. And as Microsoft well knows Google is no Canonical, Novell or Red Hat. Google is a heavyweight - it's a powerful company with considerable resources.

[...]

From most accounts and my own experience Android is intuitive and user friendly on mobile hardware such as the HTC Dream. However, there is no doubt that Android compared to full blown operating systems like Windows, Mac OSX or Ubuntu Linux is still very much a lightweight.

It is also true, however, that the trend of desktop computing is toward mobility - notebooks and netbooks. In the era of hotspots and ubiquitous Internet, consumers and business users alike want something they can take on the road with them.

The trend to netbooks and low-power consumption mobile devices favours lightweight operating systems. Users - particularly sub-notebook users - want to do much if not most of their work in the cloud. They may not be able to do everything, such as watch DVDs or play games, but they can still accomplish most of what's required to run their part of the business they work in.

Likening Android to Windows is like comparing Google Apps to Microsoft Office - it's not quite there yet. Steve Ballmer is wrong when he says Google Docs can't even do a footnote, but his point that Microsoft Word is much more powerful is well taken - for now. However, for many, myself included, Google Docs, Calendar and Gmail are more than good enough.

The critical success factors behind operating systems are device drivers and applications. More than anything else, this has been the downfall of Ubuntu and the other Linux distribution hopefuls.

Starting from the mobile phones environment and working upward, Android, backed by Google, is likely to succeed where other Linux distributions have failed. It is likely to garner support from both device manufacturers and applications vendors.

It's early days and there's a long way to go but if a Linux desktop is ever to make an impact in the mainstream, then it is likely to be Android. Ironically, by the time it takes the mantle of market leader from Microsoft, the cloud may well have made the desktop a thing of the past.

It makes some good points. But the "cloud" may not be embraced by everyone, for everything; it's a concept that's still evolving.

One of the comments left at the end of the article made a few good points on that:

[...] As for netbooks, they are such incapable pieces of hardware that the only way to get any real work done on any of them is to use them as dumb terminals, or slow-witted terminals, for the cloud. But, as Richard Stallman, one of the founding fathers of the open-source movement, has railed about, the cloud surrenders control to a corporate third party and promises a vassal-ship to corporate authority that will be, if anything, more subjugating than the rein of Microsoft has wrought. The cloud not only presents problems of reliability; it also will, I think, prove in many cases to be more expensive than shrink-wrapped software, and it gives a corporation, almost certainly a powerful one like Google or Amazon, possession and control of your data and your applications and, through the use of proprietary APIs, will lock your data and applications to that corporation.

Servers and networks get more expensive and more prone to failure as they scale and the intensity of use increases, and, thus, comes a dramatic increase the price of the service. And because the could will consists at best of an oligopoly of few corporations and because users' data and apps will be locked to that corporation's particular cloud, i.e., network, servers, and OS, users, who foolishly surrender their independence to the some corporation's cloud, will be able to do nothing but pay the price that their could vendor demands. And for that king's ransom, users will get a cloud that becomes less reliable as it becomes more popular.

But the main tenor of Stallman's criticism, which is related to oligopolistic control, is that once your rely on a cloud for your data and applications, you're owned. As tough as it is or is perceived to be to switch from Windows to OS X, Unix, or Linux, that is nothing compared to trying switch when all your data and your business critical apps are in a cloud. When you are completely in the cloud, you don't have anything left to switch. And for consumers, they may be spared paying the full costs of cloud computing, but they will pay instead with their personal information and by ceding the right to access them with advertisements 24/7, I am with Dr. Stallman: This rush towards cloud-computing is foolishness and the greatest hidden form of slavery to be foisted on users of computers since, well, Windows.

If the cloud is what netbooks shall bring, I suggest that we all take a pass.

The cloud could have some uses, but I doubt it will be all things to all people. There will always be people who, quite sensibly IMO, want direct access to and control of their own data, without relying on a 3rd party's infrastructure to provide that access and control.


Also see:

Google: Android is “the Linux Desktop Dream Come True”

The Linux Desktop Came on Little Cat Feet