Apple to unveil iCloud Monday, June 6 - <AUTHOR> http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/31/apple-to-unveil-icloud-monday-june-6/ <comment><USER2> All this speculation about iCloud being Apple's answer to the Amazon Cloud Drive / Cloud Player is missing the forest for the trees. If iCloud is about iTunes, why isn't it being announced in September with the iPod family updates, instead of at WWDC?

The logical answer is that it's not a consumer service, but a developer- focused service. iCloud will no doubt be the _platform_ for the Lala-derived service unveiled in September, but the platform is the big deal here: Think Amazon Web Services, but built specifically for integrating with iOS and MacOS, complete with a new Core Data Cloud API that makes adding sync to any app barely more challenging than writing for Core Data in the first place. And the basic tier (more than enough unless you're a top-100 app) is included in the $99/year membership.

 _That_ would be a game-changer.

<comment><USER3> Do they really have the infrastructure? Which other datacenters besides the NC one have they been building? (I think AWS has many more datacenters, both in the US and outside).

<comment><USER2> That's a really good question. The reported buildout is likely well short of AWS, but I simply cannot believe Apple would make an investment at that scale just to store millions of redundant copies of music files!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> Official Press Release: <http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/05/31wwdc.html>

</comment><comment><USER4> What is interesting is that Apple is announcing this, so I am being highly curious to see what the "big secret" announcement this year will be.

Also sorry for being a fanboy, glad to know Steve will be giving the Keynote.

<comment><USER5> They likely announced this to set expectations. They don't want headlines like "Apple Fails to Deliver Next iPhone on Time".

They want to make sure that everyone knows that this event will be about software and nothing else.

<comment><USER6> This is still strange for Apple. Speculation and then 'failing' to meet speculation always happened around Apple events, but still Apple didn't care.

Wether they do it to set expectations or not, this is the first time they give a list of what they will announce.

EDIT: spelling.

<comment><USER5> Nah, Apple does care. They are very good at playing the expectations game and have gotten better with time.

Their invitations have become less cryptic and outright explicit ([http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/02/apple-hints-at- ipa...](http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/02/apple-hints-at-ipad-news-in- march-2-event-invitation.ars)), probably precisely because disappointment about a lack of flashy announcements was fast becoming a big deal after Apple events.

There will always be stupid speculation – also before next Monday – and there will always be people complaining – also after next Monday – Apple just doesn't want that to turn into the main thing.

That press release is in context not much more explicit than above invitation to the iPad event. It's just a different tool.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> I know that everyone wants over-the-air syncing and all that, but I would much rather have a better notification system and lock screen in iOS 5.

I can imagine a lot of creative/useful 'Lock Screen Apps' being released if Apple would just release an API to access it.

Like what pg said about giving an inch to a hacker and they'll take you a mile.

<comment><USER8> Smart money is they'll have all three (OTA syncing, better notification system, and better lock screen) in iOS5.

<comment><USER9> Sources?

<comment><USER8> See:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2602939>

<comment><USER10> Is this like a joke..? That there isn't a source, its just a good guess? The link is to this discussion

<comment><USER8> It's meant to be sort of a joke.

I said, "Smart money ...", which implies speculation. The other person responded "Sources?". If I had sources it wouldn't be "smart money" (or I guess you could argue that it would be "really smart money"). Since my statement was purely speculative, I referenced a speculative source -- directly back to the echo chamber -- myself.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> Does anyone know how a Cloud music service would work for non-iTunes bought music? While I would never pirate music _cough_ , I'm wondering whether music obtained in such a manner would be available in the cloud. I can see three different ways the iCloud could work:

1) The only music available via the cloud are songs you've purchased. You have to sign in to get access to the music and only songs purchased with the account are available. Possible, but I doubt anyone would really use it if this was the case. 2) You are able to upload any music that you haven't purchased and add it to your cloud account. I think this is most likely but doesn't really differentiate it from current competitors. 3) Any music that you have in your itunes is instantly available online. I highly doubt this will be the case.

Anyone else have any thoughts on how it would work? Would you use it if you can't get pirated music on the cloud?

<comment><USER12> Option 3 is pretty much exactly what the most recent rumors suggested: "Armed with licenses from the music labels and publishers, Apple will be able to scan customers' digital music libraries in iTunes and quickly mirror their collections on its own servers, say three people briefed on the talks. If the sound quality of a particular song on a user's hard drive isn't good enough, Apple will be able to replace it with a higher-quality version. Users of the service will then be able to stream, whenever they want, their songs and albums directly to PCs, iPhones, iPads, and perhaps one day even cars." [1]

[1] [http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/26/some-icloud-music- servic...](http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/26/some-icloud-music-service- details-others-companies-likely-to-follow/)

<comment><USER11> Very interesting. If Apple is able to pull this off I'll be very impressed, but I can't see how the record labels will go for this.

<comment><USER13> The record labels are happy to get paid N times for each song that they sell.

<comment><USER14> _"We've scanned your iTunes library of 12,000 songs. The price to stream each song over iCloud will be $0.09/song. Click here to bill the $1,080 directly to your card."_

If that's not the scenario, than what is? You can only stream songs newly purchased over iTunes and only iTunes?

<comment><USER13> I suspect Apple will charge a flat rate for iCloud and allocate the royalties proportionally (like Spotify). From the customer's point of view it will be "free" to sync their music into iCloud, but the labels will get paid (again).

<comment><USER15> > I suspect Apple will charge a flat rate for iCloud and allocate the > royalties proportionally (like Spotify). From the customer's point of view > it will be "free" to sync their music into iCloud, but the labels will get > paid (again).

This is how I see it too. Customers with smaller collections (i.e. the majority) will have higher margins, and effectively subsidise those with larger (and therefore with larger royalty payouts) collections.

Works similarly to the way ISP's do: users who use say, 20GB of a 60GB cap are more profitable than a user who uses 145GB of a 150GB. Bandwidth costs are small, but on a large scale, it works.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Question of the Day: will apple finally release a "cloud" service worth using, and at what price?

The previous tentative (.Mac, and its reincarnation in MobileMe) was "not conclusive" (slow, lacking features and not worth anywhere near the asking price), and Apple has now been providing a terrible "cloud" service for 9 years (since the rebranding of iTools to .Mac).

I don't know what others think of it, but as far as I'm concerned this may make or break the next phone I go with (between iOS, WebOS and Android)

<comment><USER17> Android is a much more integrated and native citizen of the web. Apple is playing catchup here and I have my doubts that they'll make it work this time after several lackluster previous attempts. It just doesn't seem to be in Apple's blood, just as social isn't in Google's.

</comment></comment><comment><USER18> It's good and bad to see Apple really joining in to the cloud phenomenon. On the good note, nobody has really built a cloud service worth using yet, so Apple may very well be the first to do that. On the bad side, it's Apple, so it's probably going to come with a cost and interested developers will probably have to handcuff their left hand to a mac.

<comment><USER19> > On the good note, nobody has really built a cloud service worth using yet

Dropbox and Flickr are both pretty good...

<comment><USER20> Or, um, Gmail/Hotmail/Yahoo! Mail.

<comment><USER21> Or Google Docs, Google Calendar, Evernote...

<comment><USER20> It's fairly hard to find a large Web service which isn't "cloud" in some sense. Doesn't nearly all of Netflix run on Amazon AWS?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> Anyone else bored of the "i" prefix?

<comment><USER23> I don't mind it when paired with a unique product name but do find it boring when paired with an every day word, iPhoto, iBook, iPad, iCloud. What's worse is that this one uses the 'i' and 'Cloud' together... my Apple fanatic marketer is going to have a heart attack!

<comment><USER24> Other than perhaps iMac, which of Apple's i-products doesn't have their i paired with an every day word?

<comment><USER25> 'iPod' is perhaps unlike any of the others - even iMac - in that even though 'pod' is an everyday word, the resulting product name is almost completely opaque.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> Too bad web apps or Phonegap apps won't easily be able to participate in any of the syncing fun through the mobile safari localStorage API.

</comment><comment><USER27> Does anyone know where the video of the presentation will be posted?

(it's usually uploaded a few hours after the presentation)

<comment><USER28> You can subscribe to the MacRumors spoiler-free Keynote email list.

They send out links to Apple Keynote videos when they are available.

<comment><USER27> I found some older macrumors spoiler free sites and tried subscribing to the mailing list ([http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/24/january-2010-media- event...](http://www.macrumors.com/2010/01/24/january-2010-media-event- spoiler-free-keynote-stream/)). It didn't work.

I did find apples event site though: <http://www.apple.com/apple-events/>

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I don't get it, why so much excitement over a cloud service? Lion or iOS 5 I understand, but a cloud service?

<comment><USER30> Is there excitement? All I see is a press release on a website.

<comment><USER31> Ignoring the rumor community, right now TechCrunch, CNET, CNN, and Fox News all have front pages stories about Apple/iCloud/WWDC.

The BBC doesn't mention Apple specifically, but does have an article asking: Is cloud computing ready for primetime?

<comment><USER30> I'm sorry, I took the word "excitement" to indicate a heightened emotional state of some sort. Yes, I agree there are lots of sites out there pumping this for page views. I don't find that out of the ordinary, though.

<comment><USER31> Ah my misunderstanding. I'll just add then that I'm personally excited to see where iCloud will land on the speculation spectrum from a full AWS cloud infrastructure to a simple online iTunes media player. ;)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> ISTR news of a large datacenter being built by Apple near Asheville, NC; I assume this is part of that push.

</comment><comment><USER33> No more local backups? That seems like the next big step.

</comment><comment><USER34> Is there any chance to have the free email account?

</comment><comment><USER35> There is one more thing... the iPhone 5 :)

</comment><comment><USER36> I wonder if the early announcement is to put pressure on the record companies to finish the negotiations. They now have a hard deadline to get the deals signed.

<comment><USER4> _iCloud®, Apple's upcoming cloud services offering_

If it were that, would not it have been wise to mention the word music somewhere in that. Just saying that what you state does not seem to fit in as the motive here.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> It makes sense that they would pre-announce this given that it will likely include transitioning MobileMe accounts to it as well. Thus, it's probably the worst kept secret in tech that iCloud is coming.

Thus, I'm guessing all the "big surprises" have to do with iOS 5. Also, given that WWDC is a dev conference, I expect that some of the coolest announcements will be dev related and won't be talked about much in the press.

</comment><comment><USER38> Hopefully they will release an iPod Nano that has tactile controls (again!) at the same time. That is my main hope!</comment>


Lyft to Offer Waymo Self-Driving Taxis in Suburban Phoenix - <AUTHOR> https://www.wsj.com/articles/lyft-to-offer-waymo-self-driving-taxis-in-suburban-phoenix-11557259648 <comment><USER2> Behind a paywall. Anyone have suggestions on how to read this? Outline looks like it doesn't work on WSJ anymore.

<comment><USER3> [https://medium.com/waymo/partnering-with-lyft-to-serve- more-...](https://medium.com/waymo/partnering-with-lyft-to-serve-more-riders- in-metro-phoenix-a9ce8709843e) looks to be the Waymo post on the subject.</comment></comment>


Audio-Visual Studies of Simple Harmonic Motion (best with headphones) - <AUTHOR> http://memo.tv/simple_harmonic_motion

<comment><AUTHOR> The first vimeo video really gets me.

</comment><comment><USER2> So it's the same exact tune, just different instruments and different visuals.

It's really not as cool as you think. It gets boring very quickly.</comment>


Affinity Photo for Windows in free beta now - <AUTHOR> https://affinity.serif.com/blog/affinity-photo-for-windows-is-available-now/ <comment><USER2> The Mac version is great. Will try this on my Windows box later.</comment>


Warren Buffett Does Coachella - <AUTHOR> https://onetrunna.com/warren-buffett-coachella/ <comment><AUTHOR> The Woodstock of Capitalism (aka Berkshire Hathaway's Annual General Meeting aka Berkshire's AGM) is right around the corner. Is it time for a new re- branding for this legendary event?</comment>


Ubuntu Edge - <AUTHOR> http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ubuntu-edge <comment><USER4> The $32 million fundraising goal might seem overly ambitious, but it's actually more realistic than it appears at first glance, because at $600+ per unit the campaign needs only around 50,000 buyers worldwide to be successful -- or a bit over 2% of Ubuntu's enthusiastic user base, which was estimated to be greater than 20 million in 2011.[1]

PS. I just ordered one, as I LOVE the idea of an unlocked phone designed and built from the ground up by Canonical specifically for Ubuntu users, with minimal interference from wireless carriers.

\--

Update: When I posted this comment, the total raised was under $50,000. Less than an hour later, it had risen to over half a million dollars.

\--

[1] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_(operating_system)#Inst...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_\(operating_system\)#Installed_base)

<comment><USER5> i have to wonder how many ubuntu users are using ubuntu simply for the cost of owning it ($0). If that group is high, which i think it is, it may imply that a lot of those same users, might not want to put money into a project. Speculation.

<comment><USER6> I think your speculation is quite wrong. Linux users are typically the highest payers for games, on average.

<comment><USER7> On every[0] Humble Bundle so far, the highest average donations come from Linux users.

On some, they've even donated the same amount or more in _total dollars_ compared to OS X users - ie, Linux users have been more profitable _even though_ they have a much smaller market share.

In short, Linux users are _very_ profitable (per-user).

[0] I can't confirm that it's 100%, but it's been every Humble Bundle I've participated in (a lot), which I think is a large enough sample size for the purposes of this statement.

<comment><USER8> I noticed that too and have always wondered why.

Maybe the lack of games make Linux users appreciate it more?

<comment><USER9> Or maybe it's because Linux users tend to be software developers, who are mostly quite well off due to the industry right now.

<comment><USER10> Or developers appreciate the effort it takes to program something, and want to break away from the 99c per app approach and want to make a more fair payment?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I upvoted this because I think it's an interesting experiment. Attempting to raise $1M+ every day for a month, though, I think is insanely ambitious. Asking people for $830 for a device that they won't get for a year is asking a lot, particularly since the specs aren't worlds away from current phones (two years time, and probably $500 would get you a device with those specs, unlocked).

Worse, I just don't even get the use case. If I have to dock it with stuff to make it work, that means I need some kind of installation. Spending more money just so I can carry my PC around instead of having at home on a desk - hm, really not sure about that. People who use their mobile as a primary device tend not to have any sort of desktop, and I don't really get the impression they miss it that much.

<comment><USER12> I'm wondering if the ambitious goal of $32M is part of their strategy. Given that a higher goal is less likely to be met, I (and others who might consider backing) may be willing to adjust our risk function for the $600-800 such that we are more likely to back the project. Assuming that after 30 days only $20M is raised, then the outcome is as follows:

1: Nobody is actually charged for supporting the project

2: Other interested parties (phone manufacturers and carriers) will see that there is demand for a phone that doesn't even exist yet. These interested parties might consider reaching this market to differentiate from the current phone OS leaders.

3: Canonical still gets to see their OS in smartphones.

Maybe I'm reaching at straws. I do believe them when they say that manufacturing at scale is expensive.

<comment><USER13> I would have backed based on this theory if it was a Kickstarter project. Kickstarter uses Amazon and doesn't charge until the end of the drive. Indiegogo uses Paypal, and charges immediately, giving a refund if the drive fails. While both of these differences aren't quite showstoppers, they're enough that I didn't pull the trigger on something that seems highly unlikely to succeed. I wouldn't mind paying $600 for this thing if it actually happened, but I would mind having $600 sitting around in my rarely used paypal account.

<comment><USER14> In my experience, refunds on PayPal go back to your credit card. Am I wrong about this?

<comment><USER15> From [https://www.paypal.com/webapps/helpcenter/article/?articleID...](https://www.paypal.com/webapps/helpcenter/article/?articleID=94023&m=SRE):

"If you paid with your debit card or credit card, your payment is refunded to that card."

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> Pretty ambitious. Presumably they are not going to build the phone, they will do like Google and Apple and Microsoft did and find someone who is already building phones, to build them a bespoke phone. One then wonders how many units you have to commit to buying for LG to spin a variant of the Nexus 4 for you. Certainly its more than 100K phones, which gets you into the 'best' price for components (some vendors of phone parts (like some of the flash chips) won't talk to you unless you order 100K pieces).

Clearly there is a value proposition to having knowledge about all the bits in the phone, but as I discovered with the Android phones, working at Google, there are some bits which are protected in a variety of ways (basically most of the radios in phones these days are all software and that blob (the stuff that makes the radio 'work') is strictly licensed. It was, for me at least, an unexpected additional cost for the radio stuff. (I imagine that business model started with soft modems where the line access chips were $1 and the code to turn them into a 56Kbit modem was another $9 each).

Regardless of outcome, this will join a number of attempts at making a Linux phone. I wonder if anyone has collected all of the attempts into a single space.

</comment><comment><USER17> From nearly every perspective, this seems like a no brainer.

1\. The hardware they talked about would be better than anything out there now, most likely better than anything in 2014.

2\. They mentioned dual boot. If you don't like Ubuntu, you can put on Android and have a better phone than anything out in the next year.

3\. You'll get the first Ubuntu production phone.

For $600 (today) or $830 (not today?) this is a freakin' no brainer.

<comment><USER18> I disagree with (1)... that will probably be average hardware for 2014 (for high end devices because lets face it, all high end devices have roughly the same specs).

You make a lot of assumptions with (2) as well. Given Canonical has 0 experience in putting out HW I wouldn't assume a top notch product since details like build quality and materials are important.

(3) would be a negative for me... you would get the slowest, least power efficient, and most app-baron experience.

I agree it's a no brainer though... PASS! $830 is way too much for me to beta test their product for them.

<comment><USER17> You think 4 gigs of ram, sapphire display and 128gb ssd are going to be the norm in 2014? Not very likely. That would be just about double the Samsung S4 right now. I don't think it is very likely for 2014. 2015, maybe though.

And I don't think Canonical is going to build the phone but work with someone to do it.

> (3) would be a negative for me... you would get the slowest, least power > efficient, and most app-baron experience.

Do you have any data to back that up?

And don't forget that Android had very few apps when first launched. Very few. At least an Ubuntu phone will be able to run all the standard Ubuntu apps, and in converged mode, you'll get all the desktop apps as well, which is awesome.

<comment><USER19> The S4 has a 1080p screen (better than the edge) a Quad (comparable to the edge) and with SD cards, can be expanded to 128gb of storage on the cheap.

Not to mention the app selection for Android is unbeatable. Sure it didn't have many apps in the early days, but because it was one of the first to market, it will retain this lead. Look at HP's touchpad, BB10, and Windows Phone - they've had years to catch up and have failed.

The edge is a niche device and has it's place, but I'd say should be avoided by the average user.

For $305 the Nexus 4 is the no-brainer.

<comment><USER20> The Nexua 4 is a no brainer? The lack of MicroSD expansion says otherwise.

<comment><USER21> The battery is also mediocre, at least with stock Android.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I love crowd funding, and this seems like a great project. But please, before you pledge money, remember one thing:

This is not a pre-order: _nothing_ guarantees that you will ever get anything for the money you've put in.

By pledging money, you become an underprivileged investor. Sometimes, you'll get your money's worth. Sometimes, you'll loose that money. If that's OK by you, then great. If you want a stronger guarantee of getting what you pay for, then this is not the platform to use.

<comment><USER23> It's worth noting that you don't lose your money if the funding fails - <USER2> will get refunded to you.

<comment><USER24> I think they're referring to the case where the funding succeeds. As a non- proud Esquiso owner (who doesn't regret the gamble), I can testify that hardware is hard.

That said, my money's on these guys to pull it off. My only concern is quality control and support/maintenance.

<comment><USER25> That said, LOL!

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> This has been a dream of mine for several years now, and I believe Ubuntu (with Touch coming around) is currently the OS best suited for this task. However I do have some concerns which still go unanswered. Until then, I'm holding back my pledge.

1: I realize this is their first attempt at this, but if this phone doesn't support 2+ monitors, then this simply won't work as a desktop replacement. HDMI-output is nothing new. Who still uses a single monitor on their desktop?

2: I didn't find any mention of docks. I'd be interested to see if there would be any future plans to create different types of docks. I.e. tablet dock with extended battery life (like the Asus PadFone), desktop dock with 2+ 1080p+ monitor output. Preferably with the docks allowing USB connections, so that we are not stuck with buying new gear all around. Maybe even a laptop style dock?

3: Context awareness. Not sure if this is already addressed, but it'd be nice if when I docked it at work, I'd have the option of continuing where I left off yesterday. Achievable through profiles combined with some NFC cleverness? Personally, I can think of a few contexts I'd set up myself: desktop@work, desktop@home, laptop, tablet, HTPC, nightstand, car... and of course, phone.

4: Waterproof. If I'm going to walk around with my personal computer in my pocket, it'd be nice if a splash of water didn't kill it.

<comment><USER27> IF it supports wireless game controllers as well (even when docked), theres no reason this couldnt just replace an 'ouya' style device when you want to use the lounge room as well.

</comment></comment><comment><USER28> Does anyone really still want a phone you can plug into a monitor? This would have been a dream product back before broadband and wifi became ubiquitous, and before extra PCs became so cheap.

Nowadays, it seems like a much better design is to have multiple devices with different form factors that can access shared data via a cloud.

(unless this product is meant as an NSA-proof system, but I don't see that it makes a very convincing product for that use case either...)

<comment><USER29> I'd love that. The biggest problem for me is that I have a number of monitors and laptops that don't support HDMI. If there was a sub $10 adapter I could get for VGA->HDMI<-VGA then it would be a perfect world.

<comment><USER30> >The biggest problem for me is that I have a number of monitors and laptops that don't support HDMI

That's not a problem for anybody else. It's practically a non-issue.

<comment><USER31> Uh, no.

[http://shopping1.hp.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/WW- USS...](http://shopping1.hp.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/WW- USSMBPublicStore-Site/en_US/-/USD/ViewStandardCatalog- Browse;pgid=jDJwlVlq2W9SR0Yk2kO1Yuen0000R5zK4eMT;sid=Q5KE5T-ENcek5W5p4w5PceaLkZy8lKDO05s=?CatalogCategoryID=ifYQ7EN6YnAAAAEuqI1.QQd0)

Those are the monitors HP aims at the enterprise. A lot of them have _VGA_ only, and _none_ of them have HDMI.

So in my organization, we have thousands of monitors that would require an adapter at minimum and _maybe_ a couple dozen floating around that were special ordered one-offs that might have HDMI built-in.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> A bit late to the party on this post -

I think the next shift we see in mobile will be anointing the phone as the arbiter of identity vs the current situation in which our desktop / laptop OS user loosely holds the title.

I've previously expressed affinity for a future in which a device (smartphone) becomes a wallet for saving state, identity, data & applications all served by an OS that adapts based on operating environments while maintaining familiar UI/UX. This is the closest implementation I've yet to see (smart phone driving extensions and adapting to its environment by allowing full desktop OS), and I hope funding comes through just so we can inch a bit closer to making this reality.

Dropbox / cloud storage / iCloud have taken great strides in reducing the friction involved in types of device to device transitions, but we're still not truly mobile, and I'm not convinced they're the solution as opposed to being supplementary. Saving state, using your phone as identity, and carrying your data & applications with you is, what I believe, the next iteration of mobile.

Whether this information transfer is accomplished by associating devices together via the lan, a physical connection, or what have you, I feel there needs to be a physical badge component in transferring identity, and the smartphone may be it. A two factor auth of sorts for your digital self between your smartphone and a 'dumber' device.

Consider the possibilities in cars; no more fighting that quirky car UI to get directions or search through a music library. Parental controls ensuring new drivers don't drive at extreme speeds or attempt to text while driving. Abolishing keys. All possible when you have a portable device equipped with identity attributes working in conjunction with other devices and their input extensions.

28.8mm to go!

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4094318](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4094318)

[http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/28/apple-patent-would-use- the-...](http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/28/apple-patent-would-use-the-ipads- built-in-magnets-to-turn-the-tablet-into-an-in-car-entertainment-system/)

<comment><USER33> Sorry but I don't want any electronical mobile devices as my physical identity badge which includes my whole life. The dangers of that far outweigh the conviniences. You just wouldn't be able to stay anonymous anymore and everything about you would be up for grab by the government or some hackers. Also just imagine when your phone gets stolen. Your whole life in the hands of a stranger.

<comment><USER32> Unfortunately, this is already the case. For instance, your mac address is a pretty good identifier probing AP's periodically wherever you go, 99% of smartphone owners aren't even aware, let alone know to turn off WiFi if they don't want to be tracked.. If my phone fell into the wrong hands today, my whole life IS at their disposal.

With education and advancement of proper security measures I believe these concerns can be mitigated and benefits would outweigh the risks. Transferring information is still too cumbersome, in order for us to progress, this is going to have to become a reality at some point.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER34> If the Ubuntu Edge reaches its goal of $32,000,000, Indiegogo makes $1,280,000 off it.

<comment><USER35> I wonder why they wouldn't just set up their own crowdfunding page for this project. Surely the effort would be worth $1,280,000.

<comment><USER36> People are more likely to contribute if it's on a platform they trust and recognize.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER37> "We'll replace glass with sapphire crystal. A material so hard, you'll need diamonds in your pocket to leave a scratch"

I got a laugh from this because the back of my iPhone 4 had a few big scratches in it literally from carrying diamonds in my pocket (My company sells lab-grown diamonds).

</comment><comment><USER38> I really really hope I'm wrong (because I really believe in Ubuntu's vision), but what I'm gathering from this is that Canonical really has no idea how to make money.

<comment><USER39> I'm gathering that the handset makers and carriers and VCs laughed them out of the office, so they had to go this route.

I would have expected to read something like, the phone is an enhanced version of x/y/z with these features, we got a great deal from (manufacturer), but we need 50,000 pre-orders to proceed.

<comment><USER40> I guess they just didn't find investors. Jolla managed to do it because they have expertise and accumulated knowledge in the field. Canonical don't have that.

<comment><USER41> Wrong guess I'm afraid. We (Canonical) haven't announced any hardware or network partners for a general market launch.

Ubuntu Edge isn't aimed at the mass market. It's a special limited edition hardware platform which accelerates lots of interesting hardware technology combined with the Ubuntu phone. So it's designed for developers or technology enthusiasts who really value cutting edge innovation.

<comment><USER40> Then it's not so surprising, that going with extra high end non common device before releasing one available for common users didn't attract investors. It looks very risky.

Canonical had to start with practical and common device, before going into super experimental one. And with resources from the first, go for more experiments.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER42> I would like to like this, but there are some red flags: It seems like they are engineering their own high-end hardware. Are there really no off-the-shelf platforms for this? No ODMs from which they could order 10k units, including the GPU driver license?

Supposing they could get 10k units for $500 each, that means they could ask for $1M or $2m and be far more certain of hitting their goal. Why not do that?

It seems as if they are trying to fund development of Ubuntu for phones on the back of this hardware project. Or, unlike Jolla and Tizen and Firefox OS they lack launch partners, so they are doing a "Microsoft Surface." Maybe the $900M write-down of Surface hardware made them think $32M is a doddle.

Ubuntu should run nicely on Surface RT hardware... They could make an offer.

<comment><USER43> > _Are there really no off-the-shelf platforms for this?_

From what I gather, it seems the entire purpose of this 'edge' project is a _hardware_ one, not a software one. They're trying to gather the 'latest and greatest' hardware and make a phone out of it, which would by definition, not be found in an existing handset. I'm sure they'll try to push for their mobile os regardless of whether this fails or not, as it seems almost orthogonal to their mobile os efforts. Once they evaluate how feasible this 'cutting edge' handset idea is, I'm sure they'll continue to find devices to slap ubuntu touch on. But if they've had this 'premium phone' idea kicking around for a while, why not? This isn't an either/or scenario.

<comment><USER11> It will be interesting to find out how many real hardware people have had input on this. As an example, the battery is going to be "silicon-anode" \- I didn't even know that was a thing, and Google only turns up weeks/months old articles on how researchers are trying to make them out of rice. Yet they're going to stick it in a phone.

If each hardware choice has been made like that, there's a huge risk with the project. If the battery doesn't come up to snuff mAh-wise, how long will that 4G RAM / beautiful screen / 128Gb SSD actually last day-to-day, including phone calls?

There doesn't really seem to be much information about the people doing the hardware, and why they think they can stuff so much new stuff into a small package in the space of a few months.

<comment><USER44> There appears to be a company working on silicon-anode batteries: [http://www.nexeon.co.uk/about/an-introduction-to- nexeon/](http://www.nexeon.co.uk/about/an-introduction-to-nexeon/)

They claim to have a prototype factory producing 500 phones worth of battery material per day. Not the scale Samsung needs but enough for a one off phone run.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> I think this is a preview of things to come on other mobile OSs in the same way the openMoko open source phone was a harbinger of the first iPhone.

This Ubuntu prototype phone shows that the technology is ready for good phone/desktop integration. You can be sure Google and Apple are working on their own version of this and probably doing it with much more resources. Microsoft's attempt at convergence was premature and resulted in two OSs that superficially look the same but aren't really integrated.

I do think Ubuntu has much more chances of succeeding than openMoko ever had.

This indiegogo approach is a smart and bold strategy that could bring higher level of development resources than open source projects are usually able to get. Open source is good for getting a great community and great ideas together but often the thin margins and low barrier for competitors means we don't get the level of investment necessary to bring the polish, documentation and support necessary for mass appeal. A kickstarter/indiegogo approach could help with this under-investment issue.

Will it be enough? As a longtime Ubuntu desktop user, I can only hope.

</comment><comment><USER46> Wow, lot of marketing speech from a platform targeted for geeks.

BTW: sapphire crystal is extremely heavy and shatter-prone compared to GG3, for example. There's a reason Corning makes so much money.

<comment><USER47> I don't get the impression that Ubuntu is targeted for geeks, that non-geek marketing speech has been there for a long time.

</comment></comment><comment><USER48> I want this. I already pay an Ubuntu premium for System76 computers. Anyone who has the Dell dev edition does the same.

But, Canonical, can you please extend the $600 price point for at least a month? This sudden 24 hour sale is too much of an impulse buy.

<comment><USER49> No kidding. It's always so tempting to jump in on these sort of "founder" things early, but $600 is not small change...

<comment><USER44> I bought it. If nothing this is the kind of innovation which makes me excited for computing and I want to support that.

Best case the phone will arrive just in time to replace my Nexus4. Common case I get a refund. Worst case the thing is a dud, either poor build quality or under-performance.

From a high level Canonical has taken the right decisions to avoid the worst case. Being a high end device there is plenty of margin for a good case. The System on Chip is off the shelf so perforamnce only depends on the software. If Ubuntu is too heavy for mobiles then I can revert to android. The high fund threashhold means the phone will have the volume for factory production.

Before my Nexus 4 I had a N900. The N900 was the closest thing yet to a linux computer in your pocket. I loved it, you could tell engineers developed the N900 as a phone for engineers by engineers. This Ubuntu Edge looks like a true spiritual successor.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER50> As a successful crowdfunder myself, I almost cringed when I saw how many "rules" this campaign was breaking. Extremely high fundraising goal, long video, and almost no compelling reward options for people who love the idea but don't have $600 to spend. However, I think they've done at excellent job of understanding their target market. They know that early adopter/open source community relishes cutting edge hardware and a chance at becoming a consumer test group for the next step in mobile computing.

Additionally, they explain their thought processes around how they will choose the display and camera specs, which is much more powerful than explaining what the specs will be. I truly feel like I am funding an intelligent group of decision makers rather than a large scale manufacturing process.

I can't wait to see the results of the campaign and to hopefully have one of these phones in my hand!

</comment><comment><USER51> I love the idea, but I simply do not see how they can make it work at this scale. Based on the numbers they will be ordering around 40,000 units. Can you really buy custom made components in small quantities and expect to get acceptable prices?

The only way I can see this working is if they partnered with a company who will be making this phone anyway, basically a phone that looks almost exactly like Ubuntu Edge. So basically they would start with maybe a $200 (to make) top of the line smartphone from one of the big manufacturers, and then spend $600 upgrading it with sapphire lens, fastest ARM CPU, 4GB ram and all the SSD memory. Here is the thing, I can see this working, because they can sell these phones at cost, or below cost, as an investment into the ecosystem. So, this might actually be a $800 phone that costs $800-900 to make.

However, I am worried about some of the unproven components like the sapphire lens and silicon-anode batteries. Can they find suppliers, and can they make it work in the phone. And will they have to recall all 40k of those phone when the battery expends to 4x the size or blows?

The problem to liking it with Formula 1 is, in F1, the engines, the cars, and all the other components are blown all the time, and then get rebuilt, tested, refined, and tested some more, by people who know what they are doing, not consumers.

I like the ambitious project, I just feel like they really need about 4x the budget or more to pull this of.

</comment><comment><USER52> "If we don't reach our target then we will focus only on commercially available handsets and there will not be an Ubuntu Edge."

That makes so much more sense to me that I'm having a hard time understanding why Canonical would even attempt to design and manufacture their own handset.

<comment><USER53> For the same reason Microsoft made the Surface and Google has the Nexus devices. "This is how it's done" sets a very strong precedence for OEMs to follow. Canonical can set the bar high right off the bat to avoid being like the first few years of Android phones.

<comment><USER54> > _For the same reason Microsoft made the Surface and Google has the Nexus > devices._

The Nexus handsets are basically third party handsets with some input from Google, but primarily engineered and built by the hardware partner (LG, Samsung, etc). It's not really comparable.

Microsoft do engineer and build the Surface themselves, but last time I checked they just took a $900 million loss on it. Hardly great stuff.

<comment><USER23> You've got to remember that Canonical have openly said that they wish to be the open source version of Apple - and to even exceed them, if possible. So when this philosophy collides with the practical approach of the Nexus series then you have this device.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER55> Currently they are at $3.2M which is only 10% of their target. Yet the $600 level is sold out. If they had removed the cap on $600 orders, I could see this getting funded. But not if they expect the bulk of their money to come in at the $830 level.

</comment><comment><USER56> I am not the right person for this, I guess.

I constantly break my phones by smashing them (by mistake) into various solid things or water, so I never buy any phone more expensive than 200 dollars. I _really_ won't buy a phone for 830 dollars.

<comment><USER57> sapphire screen. I am in love with the idea of a sapphire screen. It's the same material as higher end watches, and those don't get scratches. I wonder how that affects its strength under dropping.

<comment><USER58> The hardness doesn't mean that it won't break or crack. The only difference is that in low-impact situations it won't scratch as easily.

<comment><USER57> I wonder how it'll handle high impact situations, then, like being dropped.

Given the novel shape, I imagine there won't be very many cases released for it...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment> cupcake-unicorn I'm kind of torn about this. While I would like to see more diversity in the phone world, I wish that the focus this time was more on the open hardware and specifications. If Ubuntu is pushing this phone tied to the Ubuntu OS, they're really not that much different than what Apple and MS are doing with their mobile devices.

I'm assuming and hoping that if this launches, the hardware and software will be open enough for people to start making their own OSes. It's just unfortunate, and I feel in a way backwards thinking, to make this Kickstarter with such a huge funding goal and not have the focus be on why it's important and why it stands apart - which is I believe the open standards for hardware and software.

I'm just not a big fan of Ubuntu as an OS, and I'd love to have a phone that was so open that I had as many options in distros as I do on the desktop. I'd much rather see a Kickstarter for a completely open hardware phone that encouraged people to be creative with both the hardware and the software, which I don't think this project is going to promote other than an afterthought.

</comment><comment><USER59> Canonical really seems to believe in the convergence of multiple computing platforms. They've staked a lot on it and ticked off a lot of people in the process. I don't know if it'll succeed, but I sure love seeing them try with such gusto. Succeed or fail, this sort of choice and innovation (not to mention debate)is what makes the FOSS community so interesting.

</comment><comment><USER60> The 4.5" 1280x720 screen kills it.

It needs to have at least 5" 1920x1080 to display 1080p content without destroying information and to match or exceed the HTC One and Samsung Galaxy S4 (and S5 since they ship in 2014).

And preferably non-Pentile AMOLED.

And also removable battery and one or more SD/micro-SD slots.

It's a pity since everything else seems great.

<comment><USER61> Wow, I expected better from people on HN. I suppose you are also one of those smug people with a 20 megapixel point and shoot who thinks it takes better pictures than my 12MP DSLR. Well I have news for you buddy. It doesn't and your 1080p pentile S4 looks no better playing movies than the Nexus 4, when held at a comfortable distance. In our house we have both a N4 and S4, and I'll take the N4 any time.

I'm no Ubuntu fan boy, but on this point, Shuttleworth is absolutely correct. 1080p buys you nothing, but costs valuable battery life and requires a much more powerful GPU to get the same performance.

<comment><USER62> Yes Mark has the right approach here, the colour rendition/accuracy of the iPhone 5 really makes it the best looking display I've seen. And I can't see the pixels - no need for higher res than that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER63> The price for one of the phones doesn't seem all that outrageous, I know if you wanted to buy a Samsung Galaxy S4 it's like $700 without a contract.

Being a college student I currently can't afford it, but I up voted and hope it works out. In the future I would love to buy a phone like this, it looks awesome.

</comment><comment><USER64> I know this may seem silly, but just reading this little copy below the 'Contribute Now' button...made me chuckle:

 _This campaign will only receive funds if at least $32,000,000 is raised by Wed 21 Aug 11:59PM PT._

Oh...just $32M. Even though I read the $32,000,000 above and as of this posting they have already raised $3.2M, I am accustomed to seeing "this campaign will only receive funds if at least $50,000" or some other reasonable figure is there. Almost feels like an April's Fools.

Alas...I hope they achieve it - if nothing else for the history they will create....and the shockwaves it will send through the VC community.

Every time a crowd-sourced project passes some psychological barrier - <USER3> $1M, $2M, $5M, $10M it makes people perk up.

If they pass $2^5M....that will send shockwaves.

</comment><comment><USER65> I think this is excellent marketing, if they get funded, they will prove that there is a market for this and it will make news for being the biggest crowd funded campaign ever. It will be all over the news and even people who have never heard of ubuntu will take a notice.

</comment><comment><USER40> Is it going to use normal glibc EGL drivers for GPU, or it will use bionic ones with libhybris?

<comment><USER66> bionic with libhybris

<comment><USER40> Not exciting then. More interesting would be to crowdfund glibc drivers.

<comment><USER66> Maybe [1], but then Canonical is aiming at getting Ubuntu into as many phones as possible, and it working with the Android stack is helping in achieving this goal.

[1] On the other hand what would be a benefit of investing into getting drivers work with glibc, other than running your classic Linux distribution?

<comment><USER40> _On the other hand what would be a benefit of investing into getting drivers work with glibc_

To run without any translation layers and bionic quirks. That's the main benefit. When the system is using glibc (like Sailfish and Ubuntu do), and drivers aren't, the only way is to translate it like libhybris does. It's a crutch at best and not ideal. It can perform well, but it's still not direct.

<comment><USER66> What are the practical drawbacks of using libhybris? Have there been some benchmarks done yet?

<comment><USER40> I guess Jolla engineers would know the most, since they are primarily developing it:

* [http://mer-project.blogspot.se/2013/04/wayland-utilizing-and...](http://mer-project.blogspot.se/2013/04/wayland-utilizing-android-gpu-drivers.html)

* [http://mer-project.blogspot.se/2013/05/wayland-utilizing-and...](http://mer-project.blogspot.se/2013/05/wayland-utilizing-android-gpu-drivers.html)

But I didn't see any comparative benchmarks published so far. Translation cost might be not critical (i.e. tolerable), but it's still a cost and native approach should be always better.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER67> I have not been this enthusiastic about a product since the introduction of the iPhone, iPad or Google Maps and I'm not even a Linux-fanboy.

I love how they are pursuing convergence of desktop and mobile, I haven't seen anyone try this successfully yet.

</comment><comment><USER68> How does this compare to Mozilla's Firefox OS? Are both phones similarly "open source" in terms of hardware and software?

</comment><comment><USER69> >We also believe the race for ever higher resolution has become a distraction. Beyond 300ppi you're adding overhead rather than improving display clarity.

This isn't completely true, higher PPI improves readability (and looks) of the text that's written using more complex characters like Chinese Hanzi or Japanese Kanji even beyond that line at smaller distances. Here's an image that illustrates this:

[http://cdn.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/hires/2011/1-toshibab...](http://cdn.physorg.com/newman/gfx/news/hires/2011/1-toshibabites.jpg)

Not to mention it's useful for displaying 1080p without losing information.

<comment><USER61> I don't read Chinese on my phone, but I do care about gaming and battery life. In both those cases, an equivalent 720p phone will outperform a 1080p phone. Shuttleworth is making the right trade-off in this case.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> I really like the idea of an Ubuntu phone, but the desktop thing is just weird.

I really can't see a use-case for it.

Aside from a drastic increase in the chances of dropping my entire computing resources in a toilet, or leaving them in a pub, usable desktops can be had for around £200.

And you still need a desk at home with a monitor, keyboard and mouse. At a time when people have largely ditched that idea in favour of a laptop or tablet form-factor.

The fact that it's on Indiegogo suggests they've tried to get commercial investors and failed because it's unmarketable, which is frustrating because I think a straight Ubuntu phone could really make an impact.

<comment><USER71> I have an use-case, but I doubt it's very widespread: I always carry my DSLR around, and wouldn't mind a few extra pounds in the bag.. so instead of a phone, I'd rather see a small _brick_ ; not even meant to be held to your face ever, but used with a headset, and with plenty of USB ports on it.

I mean sure, phones will get as fast as desktops are today, but then a bigger computer will _still_ be faster, and I would _still_ have to do any heavy lifting on the desktop.

I don't do video myself, but even "just" processing photos and using Renoise requires more resources than I think even this thing can offer; basically, I have songs I can't work on unless the machine is at least as fast as my current desktop. The same would apply for doing stuff with WebGL: it doesn't have to be a gamer GPU, but it can't be a phone either. For me, that at best does for consuming, but not for creating. Especially since creating becomes more fun when it's more fluid, the minimum requirements don't cut it and more is better.

Even a mouse I have to lug around, and a foldable full keyboard, sound better than a laptop keyboard to me - I can't stand touchpads, or keys with 50 functions on them to save space. I could even get used to running around with a backpack if it meant I could have a real keyboard. And of course there's always internet cafes, which I would expect to offer a working spaces where you use your own computer, if stuff like this became reality.

</comment></comment><comment><USER72> Is it realistic to deliver the phone at this time frame, given the vagueness of the specs? My only crowdfunding experience (Pebble) was not pleasant in it's long delays, and they gave the impression of being closer to production than Ubuntu Edge. Also, what previous experience does Ubuntu have of hardware design and manufacturing. I also realize that they can source this, like from Taiwan as they mention, but they still need to be significantly involved.

My prediction is that backing will slow considerably now when the lower backing price point has closed.

<comment><USER73> The missing bit that stands out is the processor. They seem to have all of the peripheral hardware fairly well specified, but the power consumption and final dimensions, etc. are strongly dependent on the processor they choose.

</comment></comment><comment><USER74> I thought about backing this myself, but then I remembered that it's our propensity as developers to get the best hardware for ourselves that leads to resource-hungry software, which means a poor experience for the less fortunate of our users. In that light, it seems to me that a super-high-end phone like this, particularly one aimed at developers, is obscene. So I won't be buying one of these. Indeed, I'm thinking of deliberately buying a low-end Android phone whenever I eventually decide to switch from my iPhone 4.

<comment><USER75> I have a low end Android phone (Galaxy Ace) and it's painfully slow to use. It won't even keep up with me typing in the Messages app, let alone browsing the web or using any apps.

So much so that all I use my phone for (besides the occasional call) is to enable wireless tethering and use my iPod Touch as my primary device instead.

</comment></comment><comment><USER76> "For a phone to run a full desktop OS, it must have the raw power of a PC. We'll choose the fastest available multi-core processor, at least 4GB of RAM and a massive 128GB of storage"

I would love to be wrong but I'm not buying the promise of a (real world functioning) PC on a phone. ARM based chips are 1 order of magnitude slower than a desktop x86 counterpart, currently there is no such processor to perform as desktop. Maybe they are going the intel road, anyway the indiegogo pitch sounds more like wishful thinking than a real plan.

<comment><USER77> My team dogfoods Ubuntu for Android every single day on the Nexus 4, and I'll say that it's performant enough to be a daily driver as a desktop replacement.

Edge has 4GB of RAM planned, and will run even better than the N4.

<comment><USER78> hows the camera for you? I use the n4 with android and the camera digital blur / tearing is pretty annoying. did you get around that or not use the camera much?

<comment><USER77> Ubuntu for Android is our convergence product: [http://www.ubuntu.com/phone/ubuntu-for- android](http://www.ubuntu.com/phone/ubuntu-for-android)

So we still use the Android software to drive the camera.

As a photographer though, I have to say that I don't exactly hate the N4 camera. Built-in HDR is kinda nice, and has saved many shots for me.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> Interesting that 27 people have opted to pay the $830 today, rather than the $600 that they could have paid.

<comment><USER80> I feel kind of bad for them. They really should convert these people with poor reading skills to the $600 price.

<comment><USER81> Why do you think they have poor reading skills? Perhaps they wanted to throw in a little extra, but not the next tier up at $10,000.

Remember, you can donate at any level you want. If someone donated $1000, they would probably chose the $830 option to give more people a chance to get the $600 option.

Remember, you shouldn't think of Kickstarter or Indiegogo projects as a pre- order. It's a donation to a project that you think is worthy; where you may get a substantial reward if that project goes well.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> The Edge is trying to solve a problem in hardware which is best left to software.

The problem: when you move between your devices, your apps look and act different, and they don't auto resume your state. But that's just because the software isn't mature yet. Eventually you will be able to compose a draft in Gmail online, unfinished, and the Gmail app on your smartphone will open to the draft automatically, and cloud apps will work the same everywhere--on the phone, on the desktop, and on the web.

And even if the apps are not completely identical, they will be good enough: I can switch from driving my car to a rental car without any issue; the interfaces to a car are fundamentally similar across all cars. So too with apps on various devices. It's just not a big deal. This is actually good for the Edge as most desktop displays do not support touch (and wouldn't work well if they did) so you'll still be shifting between touch and mouse, or touch and keyboard.

Solving this problem in hardware is sub-optimal: you'll always be fiddling around with monitor, keyboard, and mouse cables; your CPU, GPU, and RAM is limited; and your Internet connection will be slower from the phone than it would be had you plugged in to your 100Mbps+ cable connection from your cheap Ubuntu or Mac desktop.

</comment><comment><USER83> "Although our core business is software for PCs and the cloud, we know the phone industry pretty well too."

"We've scoured the research labs of the biggest companies and most exciting startups for the latest and greatest mobile technologies to specify the first- generation Edge."

Do the people involved actually have hardware experience? That's not clear to me, and the second passage gives the impression of treating a phone as a collection of parts.

32 mil is a pretty risky first project…

<comment><USER77> Yes, we have collective centuries of hardware experience.

No, we do not think a phone is a collection of parts.

<comment><USER83> Good to hear!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER6> It would be great if it came straight with the 64-bit ARMv8 architecture (a quad core Cortex A57 chip, I suppose), although that would mean being released in 2nd half of 2014, but they should probably wait until they can put Ubuntu 14.10 (Mir-only) or at least Ubuntu 14.04 LTS anyway. Coming with stock Android 5.0 or 5.1 would be great, too.

Why no 802.11ac Wi-Fi though? By then pretty much all high-end devices should have it (HTC One and Galaxy S4 already have it).

</comment><comment><USER84> > at least 4GB of RAM

This seems... odd, or the 'at least' bit does. The first 64bit ARM chips are due late next year, and will be very much server-targeted.

<comment><USER85> You're thinking AMD?

Current ARM processors already support up to 1TB of RAM via something called "Large Physical Address Extension".

<comment><USER84> Eek, yes, forgot about that. PAE comes back from the grave, to annoy people!

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER86> Am I missing something? How is this phone any different from say Google Nexus 4, or Samsung Galaxy S4? E.g. Google Nexus 4 has almost the same specs other than RAM, Storage and Dual LTE. But it is only for $300.

More specifically, how does the Formula 1 analogy fit in? This phone is priced about the same as iPhone, Samsung Galaxy and has almost the same specs.

<comment><USER23> You consider double the RAM, double the storage space, the fastest CPU available by HW sign-off, sapphire crystal and full metal uni-body to be 'almost the same specs'?

I must admit, I do like the look of this phone and I've followed Canonical for years now - but please, lets be realistic on both sides here - these specs are _not_ 'almost the same'. They're not even close.

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> This is the opposite of what I want.

What I want is a hub device along the lines of a Huawei Mifi device that will share a 4g connection with numerous other devices using a low power hardware and software stack, perhaps the latest Bluetooth.

Then I want my phone to be less powerful, to run most apps on the cloud and generally do little more than render things prettily.

I want camera lenses, display surfaces, input devices (keyboard, pen/stylus, augmented reality glasses, headsets, etc) to all mesh together, sharing bandwidth for intra-device communication... and ultimately all using the hub for communication.

I no longer want large and ever more powerful and feature rich phones or computers, I want to smash things up and have a choice of small bits that each do one thing very well.

Basically Star Trek communication device and then a lot of peripherals.

<comment><USER88> This is what the market will produce, eventually, after it has tried everything else, but especially everything that acts to lock consumers into long-term deals with the 2.5 remaining wireless carriers.

(Actually if this constellation of devices is mesh-like enough in architecture, the 4g modem won't be particularly special either: you'll keep it in your pocket, never look at it, and it will only be used [automatically, seamlessly] when wifi or its successors aren't available.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER89> Reached 100+ K in an hour!!!

<comment><USER11> They have to _average_ $42K an hour for the next month for this to work. That realistically means they need to pull in a few million in the first few days.

<comment><USER90> I wonder how many of us are going to watch the site for a few days, track the average hourly funding rate, then decide if we want to commit based on the likelihood of the round being successful? Sort of Victor Vroom outcome motivation.

<comment><USER89> Why do we do that? if you are interested commit, if the project fails you get the money back for sure.

<comment><USER50> That may or may not be true. Indiegogo (unlike Kickstarter) offers a flexible funding option which lets fundraises keep what they raise, regardless of whether or not they meet their goal.

[EDIT] - Never mind, just saw the fixed funding underneath the fundraising target :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER91> In just 4 hours, it is at $703,945. Already the 9th most funded project on Indiegogo.

[http://www.indiegogo.com/projects?filter_country=CTRY_US&fil...](http://www.indiegogo.com/projects?filter_country=CTRY_US&filter_quick=most_funded_all)

</comment><comment><USER92> To start with, I was skeptical. 32mil? But, I watched the video, and realised that Ubuntu are trying to achieve what I've always dreamed of and asked for: an enthusiasts phone at the cutting edge.

I've backed it. I hope that this is the future of mass produced electronics.

</comment><comment><USER93> I don't know how viable a crowd-funding campain can be for a smartphone.

1 year until delivery seems fair for the makers, but unfortunately the competition will during this time release new devices with better specs.

Looks cool though. Reminds me physically of the Motorola DROID RAZR.

<comment><USER94> Fairphone hit their target; they haven't shipped yet but it looks good. [http://www.fairphone.com](http://www.fairphone.com)

<comment><USER95> Props for mentioning Fairphone! I can't wait to get mine in October.

Ubuntu Edge does look good though, mostly because it should be a viable hybrid Mobile/Desktop replacement. While I won't be supporting it, I do hope it goes ahead.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER96> Is it just me, or does it seem like Canonical is taking all of their design cues from Microsoft at this point? Ubuntu's mobile OS uses all the same kind of edge swipes that Windows 8 uses and this phone looks like a small Surface.

<comment><USER97> At this point, everyone in the mobile OS, whether it be Android, iOS or Windows Phone is "inspiring" something from one another. I am just glad there are new competitions in the mobile space along with the fact that they are encouraging HTML5 apps.

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> Wait a second ... 32 millions ...rings a bell. Isn't that current Canonical debt ?

<comment><USER99> "they may still be $7millionGBP from being insolvent" source: [http://www.linuxadvocates.com/2013/05/is-canonical-ltd- finan...](http://www.linuxadvocates.com/2013/05/is-canonical-ltd-financially- insolvent.html)

<comment><USER23> LinuxAdvocates...

I wouldn't advise using that guy as a source of reliable information.

For far more balanced views that aren't pro-Ubuntu (necessarily) it would be more advisable to visit a site like The Var Guy.

<comment><USER98> Neither would I recommend taking my comment too seriously. I was half-joking ;-)

<comment><USER23> Yeah, I was referring to parent comments link to LinuxAdvocates. =)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Using crowdfunding wastes a huge part of the raised money on taxes. It looks like a sign of Canonical not being able to find investors. Jolla for example did, and I take it as a sign of maturity and expertise in the field.

<comment><USER41> Seriously, how exactly does crowdfunding 'waste' more money than buying something - you have to pay taxes of everything you buy anyway. You can at best argue that it's a 'waste' if we don't hit the target and no phone is produced.

The reality is that the Phone industry isn't incentivised to build products like Ubuntu Edge. It's a limited run, high-end product rather than mass- volume. In that context coming up with interesting ideas and then testing whether there's interest with crowdfunding is completely appropriate.

ps I work for Canonical so obviously I'm biased.

<comment><USER40> _Seriously, how exactly does crowdfunding 'waste' more money than buying something - you have to pay taxes of everything you buy anyway._

Unless I misunderstood something, crowdfunding (in current form) has low effective outcome, since it's taxed as presales (which axes the raised funds significantly). I think it's a bit weird, since in essence this is fundraising, and not presales, but this how it works for some reason. Investment doesn't work the same way, and the input can be used for the intended purpose much more effectively.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER100> Canonical, put Intel in this thing. 22nm Silvermont or 14nm silvermont will make this thing a beauty to behold. Reach out to your contacts within intel, because that will offer the performance you are looking for!

</comment><comment><USER101> 32 million dollars? 830$ for a device, when high end MTK based phones cost max 300 (Zopo, THL, etc.) on the European market, and less than that in China?

They haven't got a clue... Why don't they start making working ROMs for existing phones. If they targeted a few existing high end phones and the ubiquitous and cheap MT6589 models (quad core, many with full HD screens) they might have a better chance of starting to spread their OS and intriguing users and developers.

<comment><USER102> High end and Mediatek are a contradiction. They're probably looking at something like a Snapdradon 900.

</comment></comment><comment><USER103> I would have preordered it if it had a physical QWERTY keyboard.

</comment><comment><USER104> Am I the only one not using paypal for large purchases? I came home just to verify my paypal account (required for purchases over $500 and needs a check to get the routing info), but it takes 2-3 days to complete the process. I would love to support this project, but it doesn't look the logistics of it are going to work out for me. edit: Just got off the phone and my account was actually restricted for some reason. I'm in for one at the $600 rate.

<comment><USER105> I didn't have a paypal account before last night. After signing up I found the payment gateway quite broken (paypal have sent me several emails now saying i have successfully added a card ending in 0000). So now I have £800 floating around somewhere in cyberspace, accounts on two websites that I don't care to give any business to and most key to the issue; no pledge to this project.

Screw Paypal!

</comment></comment><comment><USER106> It sounds like it will only be available to people who support the crowdfunding. I'd love to buy one, but I'm on CDMA at the moment and committing to buying a phone 9 months out seems a bit idiotic, especially when you consider that I'd have to switch service providers before I can even use it. I think I would buy the phone (I love the concept) but its not something I can commit to so far in advance, even if it means missing out entirely.

</comment><comment><USER58> I love this concept, but I can't help but think:

If apple releases the next iphone with an hdmi compatible connection, that would eliminate the benefit of this, no?

<comment><USER107> You don't get a full desktop OS (Mac OS X) when you dock the iPhone. I assume that's what you mean, your comment was a little unclear.

<comment><USER58> I am imagining a layout similar to an ipad, just for a larger monitor. Apple is slowly moving their desktop OS to a mobile-like experience.

<comment><USER107> I don't think I would like a 30" iphone/ipad interface. Would you?

<comment><USER58> I don't have an iMac, so I can't say :)

But seriously: IMO, that's where the market is heading.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER108> Any idea does this also ship from UK? That's a big difference for Europeans since else we have to pay for the high import taxes (24% here).

</comment><comment><USER109> I really think they're overestimating who they perceive their target audience to be. 830USD is more than an unlocked iPhone 5...

<comment><USER23> I think you'll find that, with due respect, this will kick an iPhone 5's ass around the neighbourhood and back by the time it's released (pending funding success). Not least because it will have better specifications.

<comment><USER110> Specs don't make the phone. Original iPhone with lousy specs still would kick some modern Android phones asses in smooth-scrolling department.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER111> I admire this effort. However what we need is a fully free phone (Hardware schematics, source code). I am really disturbed about all that network connection, GPS yet so little transparency.

Have you ever seen a movie, where the rogue agent does not take out and destroy the phone, like it is a devil work :P

Any knowledge on hardware schematics, source code, license issues?

</comment><comment><USER112> Can I assume this won't work on Verizon?

<comment><USER77> We are not currently planning on supporting CDMA.

</comment></comment><comment><USER113> There might be some financial sense in backing this, whether you intend to use it or not. If it does not get funded, you get your money back. If it does get funded and made, you'll be an owner of a limited edition run of a beastly phone, whose resale value will probably be significantly higher than its current price.

</comment><comment><USER114> I love the convergence thing. I've been predicting and hoping that things would get to a point where I could just have one device that I use for home, work, and everything. Canonical is making it happen and I will do anything I can to support it and be a part of it!

</comment><comment><USER115> Regarding the desktop side....hardware wise we're not there yet but personally i'm convinced that this is the future (maybe in 5-10 years if Intel and AMD keep it up ? ). Single device which will be desktop, phone, game console, ebook reader etc.

</comment><comment><USER116> Something must be wrong here.) If it such a good idea, then there will be a long queue of big shot investors, like that one before the Apple store.

It seems that Canonical have only good concepts, but not a world-class engineering team (like Google's) to make it real.

</comment><comment><USER117> Interesting, but we'll need a faster selling rate, any friends? ;) [http://movebits.net/2013/07/23/ubuntu-edge-funding- level/](http://movebits.net/2013/07/23/ubuntu-edge-funding-level/)

</comment><comment><USER118> $32 million? Well they mention formula 1, are they bootstrapping a new team maybe?

</comment><comment><USER119> This is all cool of course. But will it last more than 2 hours on one charge?

</comment><comment><USER120> I'm so happy Canonical is pushing this innovation. As soon as I heard about their initial attempt in mobile OS on a Atrix, I knew this is where computing had to be going.

That phone's design looks so slick too!

</comment><comment><USER121> I was just talking about me wanting a mobile device I can call my phone and my laptop at the same breath. Something I can take in my pocket and hook up to a keyboard/monitor setup when needed.

</comment><comment><USER122> Well that's fucking awesome.

But uhh...doesn't Canonical already have money? :P

<comment><USER123> There is a limit to how much money one can waste while remaining wealthy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER124> A few stats for the past hour (0900-1000 EDT, 23JUL):

$18,000 raised _, $14,940 from Ubuntu Edge (18 handsets, 83% of total),_ 8 undisclosed donations

Translates to $432,000/day and $12,960,000 for the next 30 days.

</comment><comment><USER125> is it possible to download this "Ubuntu for Android" application that they are showcasing in the Software video, running on Nexus 4? Can't find anything about it...

<comment><USER126> Not according to this:

[http://askubuntu.com/questions/307054/is-ubuntu-for- android-...](http://askubuntu.com/questions/307054/is-ubuntu-for-android-by- canonical-available-to-the-average-user-yet/307060#307060)

</comment></comment><comment><USER127> I wonder what 'Fastest multi-core CPU' actually equates to. Has anyone found technical specifications that include a more specific value than 'fastest'?

<comment><USER102> The fact that they don't provide details probably means that the processor hasn't been announced yet. Presumably it will be faster than a Snapdragon MSM8974. [http://www.anandtech.com/show/7082/snapdragon-800-msm8974-pe...](http://www.anandtech.com/show/7082/snapdragon-800-msm8974-performance- preview-qualcomm-mobile-development-tablet)

<comment><USER128> Yesterday, Shuttleworth said the processor hadn't been chosen yet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER129> I only have one question - battery life? This is the only thing that matters if it becomes a hinderance, and the only thing that doesn't matter if it's not.

<comment><USER130> We have the same question, they did not mention anything about battery life. I'm not sure about the video, I don't have my sound card installed on my office workstation. If this could last as 5 hrs for an Ubuntu Desktop, I'll buy one.

<comment><USER77> We assume it will be plugged into AC when in desktop mode.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER131> Dummy question:

 _" Dual LTE antennas"_

Does this also mean double the radiation?

<comment><USER12> I think this means that the phone is equipped with antennas for different "LTE/4G" frequencies. This makes the phone work with different carriers throughout the world. The second antenna is for compatibility.

It's unlikely that the phone will spend power activating antennas that are not in use given the carrier/geographic standard, so my best guess is this: No. You will not see double the radiation.

(I could be completely wrong here, though. I'm not a cellular engineer by any standard.)

<comment><USER6> No, it seems double MIMO antenna or something. There already are multiple LTE bands. Qualcomm's S800 will support 20 different ones, and they are planning for 40 in the future.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER132> $600 is a lot to go all-in on a phone that won't hit the market until May 2014. The specs look great, but who knows what will happen in 6-8 months.

</comment><comment><USER133> They don't even have final specs nailed down, and they're trying to raise $32 million for a production run?

<comment><USER89> I think that's why it is called an "experiment".

<comment><USER133> Except there isn't "experiment" anywhere on that page, it is being billed as a final, nearly-complete product.

<comment><USER89> the campaign, I meant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER134> > Forget gorilla glass, we have crystal!

I liked that part

</comment><comment><USER135> 32,000,000... I missed a zero, first few times I read it.

If they make it, I will give a damn about Death Star not getting funded :P

</comment><comment><USER136> Can I program, build and install app right on this device without the need of another machine(macbook, pc)?

</comment><comment><USER137> Does the $830 perk include as well the docking station additionally to the phone? Or is it the phone alone?

</comment><comment><USER138> I ordered one, but there's absolutely no way this is going to crack 10 million, let alone 32.

</comment><comment><USER139> Can I hook this up to my Verizon account (which I currently still have unlimited data on)?

</comment><comment><USER140> Man, that guy needs to spend some of his money on a body language coach.

</comment><comment><USER141> More importantly: 37 people decided they wanted to pay $230 extra?

</comment><comment><USER142> God's phone

</comment><comment><USER143> I want to hook this up to an Oculus Rift.

</comment><comment><USER144> Money well spent that it was.

</comment><comment><USER145> What a talentless useless bullshit.

<comment><USER107> So don't buy it :) Better yet, don't waste another moment thinking about it!

</comment></comment><comment><USER146> Haha oh wow. They're charging hundreds of dollars to add a free OS into a smartphone. And they expect to get 32 million just for the promise. Someone lock these people up before they do some real damage.

<comment><USER107> I would downvote you if I could. I'm pretty tired of seeing snark like this and thinking how many people get discouraged of trying something new and bold for fear it would be met with an attitude like yours. Piss off.

<comment><USER146> Except it's not "new and bold", it's literally Ubuntu on a smartphone for far above the market price. Add some marketing buzzwords about how it will revolutionize computing and people start seeing clothes on the emperor.

<comment><USER59> I don't know if they'll pull off the desktop integration, but meanwhile can you recommend a phone I can put into a dock and work on as a desktop PC. That seems pretty new and bold to me.

<comment><USER128> In February, i-mate announced a Windows 8 Phone (not Windows Phone 8) [http://blogs.seattletimes.com/brierdudley/2013/02/25/new- win...](http://blogs.seattletimes.com/brierdudley/2013/02/25/new-windows-8-pc- phone-revealed-plus-tablet-and-desktop/)

A decade or so ago, a Pocket PC would have done the job. I think it was Toshiba who offered a $25 adaptor so you could plug in your PC's USB keyboard.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER147> Why not 1920x1080??? WHYYYYYYYY?????

</comment><comment><USER148> Shuttleworth has a 2012 net worth of $500 Million USD plus - yet he wants the common Ubuntu fanboy to fund his latest project?

Um....no.

<comment><USER128> He's shopping for _customers_

</comment></comment><comment><USER149> So how this works... ?

I fund, then Amazon tracks what I search by default on my machine ?

Or I fund and you FIGHT AGAINST a project maintained by voluntary people ?

OK, I 'll NOT fund you.

<comment><USER149> I see down votes in this comment I did.

Sorry if someone did feel offended.

I did feel offended by Cannonical seeking my funds, and I've my personal reasons to not fund them.

Maybe I did not express it the best way, but anyway it's my personal opinion.

I could fund them if I could make them sign a contract, about what and how is going to be done. I don't trust them, and what I did say in that comment it's just 2 little examples.</comment></comment>


Smaller Lodash Bundles with Webpack and Babel - <AUTHOR> https://nolanlawson.com/2018/03/20/smaller-lodash-bundles-with-webpack-and-babel/ <comment><USER2> As a couple of people point out in the comments, this is an explanation of needlessly complex machinery for achieving better bundling. If you're using a bundler that understands reasonably current technology (ES modules) like webpack (4), Rollup, etc., it "just works" if you use the alternative lodash- es packaging. A few years ago it may have been reasonable and necessary to pick up something like a specific webpack plug-in to use a specific library efficiently, that seems "retro" in 2018. We should all raise our expectations.

Here's an example of lodash-es in use, this is in a Angular example program but there is nothing Angular specific about the use of lodash.

[https://github.com/AngularBootCamp/filtered-list-via- observa...](https://github.com/AngularBootCamp/filtered-list-via- observable/blob/master/src/app/employee-list/employee-list.component.ts#L5)</comment>


Why local newspapers are worth saving - <AUTHOR> http://alexdmoore.com/local-newspapers-preserve-our-culture

<comment><USER2> Local _journalism_ is worth saving. Nothing he talks about is intrinsic to print.

<comment><USER3> True, but.....what else could replace them?

Good luck replicating the relationships that the local newspapers have with the people in their communities who are able and willing to report on them. It's true that we don't have to use newspapers to distribute local reporting, but the only companies in most communities that have connections to the journalists there happen to be called newspapers and happen to put out a print product.

Any new service that wants to distribute local journalism will have a hard time re-doing all the relationship building that the newspapers have.

When I started Windy Citizen two years ago, I thought we'd be able to give people a better way to find news in their city. That's gone quite well, but I've learned firsthand that the real value that the "newspapers" have is that they're the ones that have all the journalists. There's a non-profit news startup here in Chicago called the Chicago News Coop that also had a similar goal when they started up. But instead of making a cool new product and taking lessons from hacker culture, they went out and stole away the crown jewel reporters from the Tribune and the local alt. weekly. They may be broke as a joke, but good journalists definitely would like to work there, which means in the end, they'll have a good product.

You know how people on HN talk about how hackers only want to work for and with other hackers?

Most journalists only want to work for and with other journalists. I thought that was one of the big takeaways from the NewsTilt post-mortem.

<comment><USER2> Websites. Hyperlocal websites are springing up, from nationals like Patch to tiny town-focused sites. The business models aren't quite there yet in a lot of cases, and in others they can't support huge staffs, but this is true of everything from Twitter to the latest MVP here as well.

It's the journalism that matters, whether it's printed, posted, blogged or uploaded.

<comment><USER4> How is a hyperlocal website ever going to generate any significant income without classifieds?

Who's going to pay for the guy sitting in on council meetings? Or the guy digging through seemingly trivial freedom of information requests?

Journalism has always been broken in a way, it's never paid its way, but the internet is excaberating how broken it is.

We can pretend that some upstanding citizen will do it, but they won't. We can pretend a blogger will be able to face a massive libel suit or a coordinated smear campaign, but they won't.

We were lucky in the last 50 years, classifieds paid for our journalism.

Worse still for us here in Blighty, the bbc is massively funded by tax payers, the Guardian by a trust fund, we're soon to be over-run by interest groups while main streams die a death.

It's a worrying time, we can't stop it, but any free thinker greeting the present situation for the print media with glee will be waking up with a very bad hangover in 10 years time.

In the future where will be the expert in Mozambique when a crisis hits? Or Serbia? How many dissenting critics will we actually have? Who will pay for journalists to be essentially unproductive for months or even years at a time on the off chance a major story breaks? How will a major story generate any revenue anyway?

Maybe it will all work out for the best in the end. But it is still a very uncertain time and trusting one man and his blog is very dangerous.

<comment><USER5> > _We were lucky in the last 50 years, classifieds paid for our journalism._

In what way are classifieds + subscriptions not possible with websites? Any kind of hyperlocal website can have everything any newspaper can offer, the only downside is that they've got _competition_ , which they may not be able to succeed against.

<comment><USER6> They've also got to overcome some resistance to online advertising, I suspect.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I thought that local newspapers were doing fine. Most large city and metro papers are hurting, but small community papers are entirely different. Typically they are supported by ads and distributed to everyone in the community (no subscribers). They tend to have truly local news that isn't or can't be covered by major newspapers and rarely makes it into online news.

<comment><USER8> Small local newspapers are in a better place than the big boys — mainly because they don't tend to have as much debt — but they're actually harder hit by things like Craigslist and Yelp murdering previously lucrative ad markets.

Incidentally, I blame the newspapers themselves for that. They could have _been_ Craigslist, but instead they were too slow to adapt and got squashed by a better product.

<comment><AUTHOR> Agreed. Newspapers aren't dying, they're slowly committing suicide.

<comment><USER9> I don't. Craigslist took over a fat market and slashed several zeroes off the end of it. In no way does it make sense for newspapers to have preempted craigslist.

<comment><AUTHOR> Umm, it took seven years for Craigslist to become "an overnight success". Newspapers knew about it--we did and I was working for a newspaper at the time --but they ignored it.

If every newspaper in America would have gone to a free + paid model they could have saved at least half of their revenue and craigslist would still only be in 7 cities. But they wouldn't embrace change a lost big.

<comment><USER9> I don't think it's reasonable to expect any business to cut their revenues in half because they see something coming that _might_ hurt their business more in the long term. Especially without any assurances that cutting revenues now will defeat the new threat. It's so easy to sit here now and say "oh the papers should have done x y and z", but even then you don't know if it would have worked. I remain unconvinced.

<comment><AUTHOR> You sound like a newspaper publisher.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER10> There are a lot of (sometimes very vague) positive effects of local newspapers described here, but to be convinced that they're "worth saving," I'm going to need to know what the cost is.

<comment><USER11> Right now, they just need to make the transition online. But if you wanted to run a small online newspaper for a small town, the cost is low.

If a town of 20,000 people wanted to ensure that the newspaper stuck around and produced solid quality news they could access online in perpetuity, they'd need to subsidize it to the tune of about $1.25 per person per month. Advertising would likely take care of the rest.

If one was worried about government interference, this fee could be bundled this into cable subscription packages and it would basically work out the same way.

</comment></comment><comment><USER12> A lot of these points are valid. We are talking about local journalism. I use the word "newspaper" to describe the business and staff which comprise the folks that are creating the content, spending time with real people face to face and creating culture. People can call this piece marketing, but I call it supporting what I believe in. The fact is that SI and other companies are finding newer and better ways for "newspapers" to thrive. This directly keeps our nation's local journalists employed which equals more boots on the ground reporting and informing us about local issues. It may be tougher for folks from large cities to make the inter-personal connection I am discussing here, but the main point is defending American culture is valuable in units of measure beyond US Dollars.

</comment><comment><USER13> "individuals who have delicate souls who are connected to each other through local communities"

Ignoring the "Delicate souls" silliness, my community hasn't been defined by the people I'm geographically near since I was 16.

</comment><comment><USER14> I must be in the minority here, but I subscribe to and regularly read the newspaper. I'd be sad if it went away.

<comment><USER11> At Seeing Interactive, our goal is to save the journalistic and community building functions of the "paper" as well as keep the papers profitable.

The only way we know how to do that right now is to help newspapers make significantly more money online.

</comment></comment><comment><USER15> Journalism will continue to evolve, from newspaper to television network news to blogs to Facebook pages to YouTube channels to mobile apps to whatever. We have to make the distinction that newspapers is one form of journalism. It would be sad for some if the newspapers went away, just as it was sad when the stage coach or the floppy disk gave way to better alternatives.

</comment><comment><USER11> This is exactly why we're proud to have Alex as an advisor.

Our job isn't easy. We're trying to help an industry at an inflection point.

Some "papers" will survive. Some will fail. The ones we work with will have better chance at making the transition.

<comment><USER16> This actually seems like a rather thinly veiled marketing attempt for your company, pulling on the heart strings of local paper lovers for the company's profit.

There was a lot of subjective emotion and very little objective facts in the blog. How about some sources and reality checks on costs and benefits.

<comment><USER11> Maybe what you're seeing is passion for solving the problem. We feel very strongly about it. That passion is likely a big reason why Alex invested.

BTW, our customers are newspapers. I'm not sure how much "heartstring pulling" we need to do for them to see that we objectively make them more money.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> I'm sorry but they really are not worth saving.

<comment><USER11> Whether the newspaper continues to be distributed on paper, the newspaper as a service is incredibly important.

At Seeing Interactive, one of the problems we find is that people have confused an old-fashioned method of distribution with the important journalism and community building contained within. Sometimes the newspapers themselves are troubled by this very point. It has merely been a coincidence that for the last 250 years the best way to distribute news was on paper and that for the last 150 years or so it has been immensely profitable.

So when people say they don't want to save the newspaper, they're merely stating a preference that they'd rather read news online than on paper.

<comment><USER18> My two cents: I don't think much of the modern pseudo-journalism (and journalists) are worth saving. Granted, I don't subscribe to my local paper (the San Diego union is a noted piece of junk), but I can only think of a couple of writers who have the integrity and ability to call themselves journalists.

Most of the content produced nowadays has been chosen specifically to elicit a strong emotional response from readers/viewers. It's not worth saving, in my mind, because I disagree with the central precept of the linked article, that the content they generate is worthwhile.

Besides, most of the stuff is just reprinted from reuters anyhow. Even the comics stink nowadays. Ever read the sports section? Look at how backwards (and intentionally so!) the sports sections are (if you're unfamiliar with how wrong modern sports "journalists" are, read FireJoeMorgan).

In short, journalism already _has_ gone away. All that's remaining is to clear the husk that remains.

<comment><USER19> There are plenty of non-profit news operations popping up around the country that you might find more valuable than the pageview-centric for-profits. Check out Voice of San Diego: <http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/>

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> This reminds me of a Wizard of Id comic where the local paper comes in to interview the king.

Reporters: We'd like to ask you some questions on your environmental record.

King: How many trees are killed to print your paper?

-Reporters leave-

Squire: That was a quick interview.</comment>


Inxight on Google - Knowledge has replaced OS in post microsoft area - <AUTHOR> http://www.inxight.com/products/se_google/features_techspecs.php <comment><AUTHOR> here a discussion <http://slotblog.blogspot.com/2007/03/inxight-on-google- knowledge-has.html></comment>