Smartphone Buyers Guide: The Best of the Best

via Gizmodo by John Herrman on 6/12/09

As the dust settles from the last two weeks of mobile madness, one question remains unanswered: Which of the new generation of smartphones should you actually buy? We've collected everything you need to know.

We've selected the five phones that most feel like modern handsets to us—the iPhone 3G, iPhone 3G S, the Palm Pre, the HTC Magic (or, as we soon expect, the T-Mobile G2) and the BlackBerry Storm—and broken them down by hardware, software and cost. This is a guide in the strictest sense, meaning we aren't declaring winners or losers, just giving you the information you need to make your own choice. So! On with the matrices.

Phones' hardware specs tend to dominate carriers' marketing, but in many cases they just don't mean much, with a few exceptions: screens, storage, graphics performance and input.

The iPhones and Pre hold a sizable advantage in the screen department, trumping the G2, which doesn't have multitouch, and the Storm, which has an ill-conceived pseudo-multitouch clickscreen that left most reviewers at best underwhelmed, and at worst downright frustrated.

In terms of storage, our phones take two fundamentally different approaches. The iPhone and Pre include healthy amounts of nonremovable storage—in the case of the iPhone 3G S, up to 32GB—which makes sense: if we're going to use our phones as they're marketed (as multimedia devices), we need space. The G2, like the G1 before it, depends on a removable microSD card for file storage, since its inbuilt memory is measured in megabytes. So does the Storm. This is fine if the carrier bundles the handset with a capacious card; Verizon is good about this. T-Mobile, on the other hand, shipped the G1 with a pitifully small 1GB card, so we'll just have to hope they're more generous with the G2.

Technical 3D ability is actually fairly uniform across this hardware, with the exception of the iPhone 3G S, which is, in this area, a next-gen product. Only Apple and HTC, though, give developers any meaningful kind of access to their handsets' graphics accelerators, meaning the G2 and iPhones (particularly the bulked-up 3G S) will be the sole options for would-be gamers. And of the two platforms, iPhone OS has amassed plenty of serious gaming titles, while Android, let's be honest, hasn't.

The Pre is an obvious standout in that it has a hardware keyboard in addition to its touchscreen. The hardware QWERTY/onscreen keyboard debate is all about personal preference, so whether this is a boon or a burden is up to you. Typing on a screen is an acquired skill—but much more so on the Storm than the iPhone or G2.

Battery life would seem to be a valuable metric; it's not. The differences in capacity and claimed endurance don't really matter much, since realistically, they all need to be charged nightly.

Note: the Storm is due a minor hardware refresh, possibly quite soon. The main change, it's been rumored, is a different touchscreen.

The greatest hardware in the world couldn't save a phone with shitty software, and your handset's OS is the single largest determining factor in how you'll enjoy your phone. We've explored the differences between the major smartphone platforms at length here, and there's no point getting too far into the specific differences right now.

To summarize: iPhone OS claims advantages in ease of use, its burgeoning App Store, and a respectable core feature set, but falters on multitasking and its lack of ability to install unsanctioned apps. The Pre's WebOS is extremely slick and friendly to multitasking, but its App Catalog is light on content, and its development SDK is somewhat restrictive. Android and BlackBerry OS are both more laissez-faire, letting users install apps from whatever source they choose. Neither of their app stores is spectacular, but Android's is markedly less anemic. More on app stores here.

Carrier preferences will often override prices, but here they are anyway. The Pre and G2 are the most economic options, and the Storm roughly ties the 3G S as the most expensive. (It's easy to underestimate how much a small monthly cost difference can add up over two years.) But again, carrier loyalty (or more likely, disloyalty) and coverage quality is as important as cost. If Sprint's killing your Pre buzz, it could be worth waiting until next year, when Verizon is rumored to pick it up. Likewise, if T-Mobile coverage in your area is patchy, don't worry: by the time T-Mobile actually offers the G2, we'll probably have at least another functionally identical handset lined up for release elsewhere.

So there you have it: everything you need to know about the latest crop of consumer smartphones. Go forth, and be gouged.

Giz Explains: GPGPU Computing, and Why It'll Melt Your Face Off

via Gizmodo by matt buchanan on 5/13/09

No, I didn't stutter: GPGPU—general-purpose computing on graphics processor units—is what's going to bring hot screaming gaming GPUs to the mainstream, withWindows 7 and Snow Leopard. Finally, everbody's face melts! Here's how.

What a Difference a Letter Makes
GPU sounds—and looks—a lot like CPU, but they're pretty different, and not just 'cause dedicated GPUs like the Radeon HD 4870 here can be massive. GPU stands for graphics processing unit, while CPU stands for central processing unit. Spelled out, you can already see the big differences between the two, but it takes some experts from Nvidia and AMD/ATI to get to the heart of what makes them so distinct.

Traditionally, a GPU does basically one thing, speed up the processing of image data that you end up seeing on your screen. As AMD Stream Computing Director Patricia Harrell told me, they're essentially chains of special purpose hardware designed to accelerate each stage of the geometry pipeline, the process of matching image data or a computer model to the pixels on your screen.

GPUs have a pretty long history—you could go all the way back to the Commodore Amiga, if you wanted to—but we're going to stick to the fairly present. That is, the last 10 years, when Nvidia's Sanford Russell says GPUs starting adding cores to distribute the workload across multiple cores. See, graphics calculations—the calculations needed to figure out what pixels to display your screen as you snipe someone's head off in Team Fortress 2—are particularly suited to being handled in parallel.

An example Nvidia's Russell gave to think about the difference between a traditional CPU and a GPU is this: If you were looking for a word in a book, and handed the task to a CPU, it would start at page 1 and read it all the way to the end, because it's a "serial" processor. It would be fast, but would take time because it has to go in order. A GPU, which is a "parallel" processor, "would tear [the book] into a thousand pieces" and read it all at the same time. Even if each individual word is read more slowly, the book may be read in its entirety quicker, because words are read simultaneously.

All those cores in a GPU—800 stream processors in ATI's Radeon 4870—make it really good at performing the same calculation over and over on a whole bunch of data. (Hence a common GPU spec is flops, or floating point operations per second, measured in current hardware in terms of gigaflops and teraflops.) The general-purpose CPU is better at some stuff though, as AMD's Harrell said: general programming, accessing memory randomly, executing steps in order, everyday stuff. It's true, though, that CPUs are sprouting cores, looking more and more like GPUs in some respects, as retiring Intel Chairman Craig Barrett told me.

Explosions Are Cool, But Where's the General Part?
Okay, so the thing about parallel processing—using tons of cores to break stuff up and crunch it all at once—is that applications have to be programmed to take advantage of it. It's not easy, which is why Intel at this point hires more software engineers than hardware ones. So even if the hardware's there, you still need the software to get there, and it's a whole different kind of programming.

Which brings us to OpenCL (Open Computing Language) and, to a lesser extent, CUDA. They're frameworks that make it way easier to use graphics cards for kinds of computing that aren't related to making zombie guts fly in Left 4 Dead. OpenCL is the "open standard for parallel programming of heterogeneous systems" standardized by the Khronos Group—AMD, Apple, IBM, Intel, Nvidia, Samsung and a bunch of others are involved, so it's pretty much an industry-wide thing. In semi-English, it's a cross-platform standard for parallel programming across different kinds of hardware—using both CPU and GPU—that anyone can use for free. CUDA is Nvidia's own architecturefor parallel programming on its graphics cards.

OpenCL is a big part of Snow Leopard. Windows 7 will use some graphics card acceleration too (though we're really looking forward to DirectX 11). So graphics card acceleration is going to be a big part of future OSes.

So Uh, What's It Going to Do for Me?
Parallel processing is pretty great for scientists. But what about those regular people? Does it make their stuff go faster. Not everything, and to start, it's not going too far from graphics, since that's still the easiest to parallelize. But converting, decoding and creating videos—stuff you're probably using now more than you did a couple years ago—will improve dramatically soon. Say bye-bye 20-minute renders. Ditto for image editing; there'll be less waiting for effects to propagate with giant images (Photoshop CS4 already uses GPU acceleration). In gaming, beyond straight-up graphical improvements, physics engines can get more complicated and realistic.

If you're just Twittering or checking email, no, GPGPU computing is not going to melt your stone-cold face. But anyone with anything cool on their computer is going to feel the melt eventually.

Top 10 descoperiri cu Google Earth

via Realitatea .NET - IT & Ştiinţă by Realitatea.NET on 4/24/09

În ultima perioadă apar pe internet sau la televizor tot mai multe ştiri despre descoperirile pe care oamenii obişnuiţi sau oamenii de ştiinţă le-au făcut cu ajutorul aplicaţiei Google Earth. În top 10 descoperiri cu Google Earth vezi putea vedea lucruri şi locuri uitate de lume sau neştiute până acum.

1.) Un inginer aeronautic a descoperit cu ajutorul Google Ocean, în largul coastei Africii, o zona de mărimi considerabile care pare a fi construită de om şi care se potriveşte cu locaţia în care se presupune că s-ar fi aflat Atlantida.

Reţeaua de linii încrucișate care poate fi observată la 620 de mile de coasta Africii, în apropierea insulelor Canare, pe fundul Oceanului Atlantic, formează un patrulater, cu o suprafaţă de circa 20.000 de kilometri pătraţi. Zona a fost descoperită de un inginer aeronautic folosindu-se de noua funcţie implementată în Google Earth. 

Imaginea poate fi observată de oricine la coodonatele 31 15'15.53N cu 24 15'30.53W. Experţi în istoria Atlantidei au afirmat că aceasta poate fi una dintre locaţiile posibile ale insulei, aşa cum a fost descrisă de filosoful grec Platon. Potrivit acestuia, oraşul s-ar fi scufundat după ce locuitorii săi ar fi încercat, fără succes, să cucerească Atena în jurul anului 9000 î.e.n.

Ulterior urmele au fost analizate şi s-a constatat că nu erau altceva decât rutele parcurse de sonarele ce colectau date pentru realizarea de harti. subacvatice.

2.)   O altă descoperire făcută cu ajutorul Google Earth este acest cerc despre care s-a crezut că a fost făcut cu o tehnologie extraterestră. Având în vedere că semnul are forma siglei Firefox oamenii de ştiinţă cred că este vorba doar de opera câtorva fani ai companiei care au creat giganticul logo într-un lan de porumb din Oregon SUA cu ocazia celebrării celui de-al 50.000.000-lea download al browserului Mozilla.

 

 

3.)    Pe locul trei al descoperirilor cu Google Earth se clasează acest lac cu apă roşiedin Iraq. Imaginea a fost descoperită în anul 2007 şi a dus o serie de speculaţii macabre bazate pe declaraţiile unui informator irakian care spunea că resturi omeneşti, sau ceea ce rămâne din populaţie în urma masacrelor, se aruncă deseori în canalele de acest fel. Nimeni nu a oferit până în prezent o altă explicaţie oficială, însă specialiştii chimişti au declarat că cel mai probabil culoarea roşiatică a apei provine în urma proceselor de tratare a apei.

4.)    Aceste formaţiuni ciudate au fost observate cu ajutorul Google Earth în apropiere de bazele aviatice din Statele Unite ale Americii şi Marea Britanie. Deşi Ministerul Apararii din Anglia a suştinut că ar fi trasee pentru motociclete, scepticii sunt de părere că aceste semne ar putea fi spaţii de calibrare pentru sateliţi.

5.)  Fanii prezentatoareei TV, Oprah Winfrey, o pot vedea oricând doresc pe Internet sub formă de... labirint. Aceasta are parte de un gigantic labirint creat de un fermier din Arizona. Acesta a fost un cadou pe care Winfrey l-a primit în 2004 în semn de preţuire din partea fanului său. 

6.)    În anul 1967, atunci cand a fost construit acest complex din San Diego, nu se utilizau la scară largă tehnologiile de fotografiere din satelit. Totuşi, odată cu lansarea Google Earth, un explorator a descoperit că cele patru cladiri care au forma literei “L” sunt aranjate în forma de svastică. Un ofiţer al Marinei Militare din SUA a declarat, în 2007, că se cheltuiesc aproape 600.000 de dolari pe an pentru ascunderea şi mascarea clădirii pentru a nu fi asociată cu simbolistica emblemei.

 

 

7.)    SS Jasmin este un vas cargo bolivian care s-a scufundat în apropiere de coasta Sudanului în anul 2003. În această imagine se poate observa epava vasului Jasmincare este una dintre cele mai mari epave vizibile prin Google Earth.

8.)    Aceasta formaţiune descoperită în Canada, este în întregime naturala. Faţa din imagine este de fapt o vale formată în urma unei  alunecari de teren şi  din cauza eroziunii solului argilos. Cei care au cercetat îndeaproape imaginea spun că forma din fotografie seamană foarte bine cu o persoană care poartă cercei sau chiar ascultă muzică în căşti, însă specialiştii geologi au explicat că dunga din imagine nu este  altceva decât un izvor subteran de petrol.

9)    În imaginea de mai sus se poate observa un cimitir al avioanelor din Arizona în care se găsesc peste 4000 de avioane militare. Aceasta este una dintre cele mai populare imagini descoperite cu Google Earth Earth şi postate pe Internet.

10)    Pe locul 10 în topul descoperirilor făcute cu Google Earth se situează o plantaţie de marijuana. Autorităţile elveţiene au descoperit din întâmplare o imensa plantaţie de marijuana cu ajutorul Google Earth. În urma acestei descoperiri au ajuns după gratii nu mai puţin de 16 persoane. Poliţia a confiscat peste 1,2 tone de marijuana, cantitate evaluată la 2,5 milioane dolari.

Stay At the Hotelicopter: The World's First Flying Hotel

via Gizmodo by Sean Fallon on 3/27/09

Since 2004, the company behind the Hotelicopter has been working to modify a Soviet-made Mil V-12 into two world firsts: the "world's biggest helicopter" and the "world's first flying hotel."

As you might have guessed, the experience on board the Hotelicopter is far from your standard Motel 6. This gigantic flying Titanic machine features everything you would expect from a 5-star hotel—from private entertainment systems and room service to extras like spa treatments, yoga classes, gaming and a tea garden.

If you were wondering just how big and powerful this flying hotel really is, check out the specs:

* Dimensions Length: 42 m (137 ft)
* Height: 14m (45 ft)
* Maximum Takeoff Weight: 105850 kg (232,870 lb)
* Maximum speed: 255 km/h (137 kt) (158 miles/h)
* Cruising speed: 237 km/h (127 kt) (147 miles/h)
* Original Mi Range: 515 km (320 mi)
* Our augmented Mi Range - 1,030 km (640 mi)

The inaugural flight is set to take place on June 26th for an undisclosed price. Obviously, only the affluent need apply—but anyone that is interested can head on over to the Hotelicopter website to get more info about setting up a reservation. [Hotelicopter Thanks Zlooop!]