The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your
kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct, no programming
questions and please don't post ads.
And with that all my energy. For last 45 days, its been 18 hours a day coding and cut off from rest of the world. Now it will take two days for me to even wake up. There are some wonderful prototypes built by some really talented developers. I am going for a break. This 45 days would remain to be one of the most memorable moments of my professional career alongside Ultrabook App Innovation contest. Enjoy some Hollywood movie style applications.
After couple of days if break, I will start writing a series of articles of every possible aspect that I discovered of Perceptual Computing. I have already made all my code available to Intel and I will do the same here in Code Project too.
Unless the author(s) of these items happen to chance on by the lounge, you do know that they won't see this don't you? Why not post your question somewhere that the author will see it? Perhaps you could try the forum at the end of the article. That seems like it might be a good fit.
I was brought up to respect my elders. I don't respect many people nowadays.
Another user is building a PC and asked some questions.
I have long wanted to "Build A Computer", but not like I did in the old days.
I think I "built my own" about 5 times, back when that actually saved serious amounts of money; like fifty percent of the cost or whatever. I mean like a week or two of salary for about a day's work.
That isn't realistic any longer.
What I would like to do is to build the thing so that every feasible component can be segmented and separated from the rest, in such a way that the entire system spread out and connected (via USB ? Whatever) in a manner that allows for easy access to replacement, service, maintenance, repair, and upgrade.
i.e., There won't be these boxes on your desk which have as many cables as the 1970s progressive rock bands had for their live performances.
More to the point, the computer won't be an appliance on the desk any longer, but instead the desk will be the computer.
I'm nowhere near being an out-of-the-box creative thinking trailblazer on this. Almost every bank has thought this idea through years ago. Visit a branch and your teller will have a computer that is designed almost exactly along these lines of thought; the screen is where he needs to see it, and the keyboard is probably split into two pieces. There is probably no mouse, but instead a touch pad, and almost guaranteed to be suspended in a position that is out of the way while still being easily accessible.
The facts be, however, that today's user needs/wants these things in a computer
As of this writing, the one part that really still needs a wired cable is the screen.
The Audio could be either speakers or headphones for output. For input there would be a microphone. The user may or may not need a cable for any / either / both of those.
The Ports would be, most probably today, USB.
A big selling point of this idea would be data safety.
If, for $90, you could have a second disk drive, and just swap them in and out weekly, then you would lose a few days' data when (not if) one of them fails.
This would be far more likely to encourage personal responsibility if it was a simple swap over thing that takes 60 seconds.
The biggest of all selling points to me, though, would be neatness. by running the wires and attaching them neatly so that you don't have seventeen wires like the data comm rack in the basement of most office buildings, that would look so much nicer in the home, and would probably be workable for the office as well.
The fly in the ointment behind all this is the $399 refurbished computer from WalMart, K-mart, and Connie's Corner Computers. Everybody likes nice things, but just about everybody will settle for less convenience and more clutter if the price is much lower.
The Kitchener-Waterloo OWASP Chapter has been founded we are having our first meeting on
Tuesday February 26th 2013, 6:00-8:00pm
Location: Morty's Pub (Basement) 272 King Street North, Waterloo Ontario
Colin Delaney - Security Manager from McAfee Anti Virus - will be presenting. If you're interested in security, interested in OWASP or just interested in connecting with other professionals in general this is an AWESOME opportunity for you to come out. If you're not from the K-W but have colleagues/friends who are, spread the word.
We're an OWASP chapter just getting going, pretty much down the highway from Code Project's headquarters. I figured a lot of Canadians & hopefully around K-W use this site. So why not reach out to them? We're a developer community interacting with another developer community. Given that K-W is dubed the "Silicon Valley" - North there's a lot of potential I see here
There's a meetings and get togethers forum that you should have used for this post, rather than putting it in the lounge. It'll be gone from the front page soon, and by tomorrow, it'll disappear several pages in, so people will forget it.
I was brought up to respect my elders. I don't respect many people nowadays.
Where is a place where a real nerd can connect with a real wirehead ?
Jobs come and go these days.
If I could connect with one or two hardware wizzards, who know how to put chips on boards, and make the connection with some sort of low-volume board stuffer, and combine that with the firmware smarts I have in my head, the two or three of us could do wonders for the planet.
I can also see this plan backfiring, burning everybody who gets involved; including burning me the worst. If the trinket ever sold more than, oh, a week's worth or a month's worth of salary of either one of us, the greed and hate factor could turn friends into overnight enemies.
Anybody been there ? Done that ? Never going back ? Raring to go again ? Major Failure ? Fantastic Success ? What went wrong ? What did you learn ?
I've never gone as low as designing boards. But I have worked for a number of startups and folks that had bright ideas here are my experiences.
First company I worked for - the PYXIS innovation, amazing company, worked with the best president & met the smartest man I ever programmed with there - He's a mgr at Google now. They had an excellent idea & product solving many problems of the modern GIS environment & allowing military, scientists, GIS, to make informed excellent ideas. - The problem, company laid me off 4 times, Things have turned into a 10 yrs R & D exercise. Excellent technology - lack issues bringing it to market, paid well when I was working, when I wasn't working and volunteering my time during funding rounds - got behind in my bills had trouble catching up.
Worked for a GIS - Researcher in Calgary, he dreamed of turning his research into a company, trouble was he used his research grant money for that, big no no.
Padre Software - Worked for a great company, great employers, trouble was no room for career growth as it's still a small company.
My experience it's the majority of the small companies doing true engineering and building things and stretching the limits of technology, at least in Canada. The larger companies are build, monetize, maintain. Not so much engineering.
I'd love to work for a smaller company and do great things, the issue is in my experience they can't afford the level I am at these days like the larger companies can. I don't have the money to run my own start up.... Then there is the whole monetization thing which tends to kill companies..
In Canada there are a lot of government programs to drive innovation and design and technology. So in my experience what happens, is companies hire a bunch of engineers to engineer this killer product and then suck at bringing it to market!
One really has to wonder why that is, in the years of my professional experience, companies need early adapters of their technology. These early adapters need to buy the product invest money in the development of the product so the company can meet the needs of the early adapters while continuing to hammer out a better generic product for wide spread consumerism. I find this especially true in the IT sector.
Monetization to me, means taking all you engineering, which is funded through private/angel/VC investors or government R&D funding or grants and developing a plan to sell or generate revenue from your engineering efforts. Even once you've developed a plan it doesn't always materialize overnight. The difficulty is, you can hire smart, ambitious university graduates cheap to drive you engineering, the problem with that is they're ambitious and they're cheap (I Know I used to be one). So you have to hire some seasoned engineers to lead and drive the product & process, the problem there is they're not so cheap, the complexity of your product determines the ratio of seasoned vs graduate engineers that you need.
When you find an early adopter who will buy your product, now you really struggle because you need their money, but you can't customize to much otherwise you end up with a product only they can use, and therefore you're just a glorified consulting shop milking off of your early adopter (I've experienced this ). You never actually get to develop the general product which will allow you to see real cash flow.
The biggest struggle for any young startup is to keep enough revenue, allowing them to keep their staff, especially senior staff in place while they goto market at the same time as remaining generic enough to be marketable to more then your early adapters of your technology. If you can manage that you'll become a millionaire.
I continue to read your ideas with interest, bordering on fascination.
the complexity of your product determines the ratio of seasoned vs graduate engineers that you need.
A numeric evaluation of that is impossible.
Until somebody invents wealth-o-matic, I suppose; hmm, I can put it online, and offer it free and cover it with annoyance-ware so that people close it before they consider the first thing about it.
Seems like everybody believes that "this product is so simple, it's actually amazing" and then it has 9 separate microprocessors with 300 paths between them on a 7 layer board.
Anyway, how would anybody define "complexity" ? After calculating that number, what ratio would I need for this amazingly simple device that needs a seven layer board inside to connect the nine different microprocessors ? (from nine different chip makers, of course).
Complexity is a very hard thing to gauge, because an equal component in the equation is when is it complex but "good enough" and that is a slippery slope. It seems the general public is willing to accept the first the latest and the greatest providing that it is the latest and greatest with all it's bugs. Consider the iPhone 5 & their mapping trouble. If you're not the first to market in this "era", with your bugs, it seems your idea & your technology is Dead on arrival. I've seen plenty of applications demo'd that solve some major defects in facebook, but I bet you couldn't tell me 1. The reason being with all their bugs and all millions of users accept facebook. So if I could define complexity.... I wouldn't be hanging out on code project on a Wednesday night.
36,000 ft, 2 hours until San Diego.... reading CP.
rebooted production machine for customer...
read and responded to all email...
core i5gen 3 laptop doing AMAZINGLY well on battery. going to run out of flight before battery.
chatting with wife (way cool)
might be a useful feature.
omg, my buns hurt, completely asleep... I miss my Temperpedic office chair
<italic>You're going to tell me what I want to know, or I'm going to beat you to death in your own house.
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759