Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Iphone Cellphones The Almighty Buck Apple

Apple Announces Smartwatch, Bigger iPhones, Mobile Payments 730

Today at Apple's September press conference, they announced the new iPhone 6 models. There are two of them — the iPhone 6 is 4.7" at 1334x750, and the iPhone 6 Plus is 5.5" at 1920x1080. Both phones are thinner than earlier models: 5S: 7.6mm, 6: 6.9mm, 6 Plus: 7.1mm. The phones have a new-generation chip, the 64-bit A8. Apple says the new phones have a 25% faster CPU, 50% faster GPU, and they're 50% more energy efficient (though they were careful to say the phones have "equal or better" battery life to the 5S). Apple upgrade the phones' wireless capabilities, moving voice calls to LTE and also enabling voice calls over Wi-Fi. The phones ship on September 19th, preceded by the release of iOS 8 on September 17th.

Apple also announced its entry into the payments market with "Apple Pay." They're trying to replace traditional credit card payments with holding an iPhone up to a scanner instead. It uses NFC and the iPhone's TouchID fingerprint scanner. Users can take a picture of their credit cards, and Apple Pay will gather payment information, encrypt it, and store it. (Apple won't have any of the information about users' credit cards or their purchases, and users will be able to disable the payment option through Find My iPhone if they lose the device.) Apple Pay will work with Visa, Mastercard, and American Express cards to start. 220,000 stores that support contactless payment will accept Apple Pay, and many apps are building direct shopping support for it. It will launch in October as an update for iOS 8, and work only on the new phones.

Apple capped off the conference with the announcement of the long-anticipated "Apple Watch." Their approach to UI is different from most smartwatch makers: Apple has preserved the dial often found on the side of analog watches, using it as a button and an input wheel. This "digital crown" enables features like zoom without obscuring the small screen with fingers. The screen is touch-sensitive and pressure sensitive, so software can respond to a light tap differently than a hard tap. The watch runs on a new, custom-designed chip called the S1, it has sensors to detect your pulse, and it has a microphone to receive and respond to voice commands. It's powered by a connector that has no exposed contacts — it magnetically seals to watch and charges inductively. The Apple Watch requires an iPhone of the following models to work: 6, 6Plus, 5s, 5c, 5. It will be available in early 2015, and will cost $349 for a base model.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Apple Announces Smartwatch, Bigger iPhones, Mobile Payments

Comments Filter:
  • by NotDrWho ( 3543773 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:33PM (#47864355)

    After all, you trusted us with your nude photos.

    • by Jeremiah Cornelius ( 137 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:59PM (#47864601) Homepage Journal

      Apple doesn't middle-man the banking/merchant transaction in their model.

      Unlike Google/Samsung/Amazon, they are not collecting or monetizing transaction or location info of buyers. They limit their liability and focus on where they make real money.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        Apple doesn't middle-man the banking/merchant transaction in their model.

        Unlike Google/Samsung/Amazon, they are not collecting or monetizing transaction or location info of buyers. They limit their liability and focus on where they make real money.

        From a different security standpoint, it hardly matters. I am simply astounded that Apple chose to support NFC in their new phone.

        NFC was cracked before it was even commonly available in phones by the same researcher who read (and cloned!) RFIDs from passports in the pockets of passersby from his car 10 meters away, in San Francisco.

        He later proved that it was possible to gather "secure" information from NFC-equipped phones from 10 feet away, using concealed-on-person equipment that cost less than $20

        • by rjstanford ( 69735 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:57PM (#47865305) Homepage Journal

          Its a very different proposition to have an "always on" proximity-activtated chip (such as those embedded into your credit cards) and one that's only active for a single transaction based on a physical finger-swipe. The whole point is that even when (not if) the communication is intercepted, what you end up with is like sniffing SSL traffic - you could replay the "Please pay Target $20 to fulfill exactly this invoice" conversation, certainly, but that's not particularly useful to a thief. Having the physical TouchID in the middle also ensures that the phone isn't chatting to just anyone at random times.

        • I appreciate your concerns about NFC. But NFC is really a transport, not a privacy control. If simple privacy controls were implemented, relying on limited NFC range for reducing attack opportunity? That's a problem itself.

          I am lead to believe that intercepted transactions with the Apple payment model are nearly useless. They may ultimately reveal predictable sequences, to establish later unauthorized transactions - but this is speculation. The transaction is privacy-protected with its own cryptographic t

      • by Maury Markowitz ( 452832 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:55PM (#47865271) Homepage

        > Apple doesn't middle-man the banking/merchant transaction in their model.

        *THAT* was the big takeaway from the announcement. They're not doing PayPal, they're simply providing tokens to the bank, like any NFC credit card.

        That said, the film about the payment process falls on deaf ears anywhere outside the US. I did about four transactions today, three of them were tap-to-pay, one was cash. Having all my cards in one place and eliminating my wallet (I *rarely* use cash, maybe twice a week) is something worth paying for.

    • by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:50PM (#47865203)

      You do realize that they already have credit card numbers for over 500 million customers, right? And practically anything at all is more secure than what the US uses right now for retail payments. Based on what they said in the keynote, the phone stores your information in a dedicated hardware chip that's separate from the rest of the system, never transmits it to Apple or the retailer, makes use of one-use codes for actually making the payment, and secures it all behind a fingerprint scan. Given that my current options are either cash or a plastic card that can used by others if it's ever copied, memorized, stolen, or skimmed, this seems like a step in the right direction.

      (also worth noting: the nude pics things affected pretty much all of the big tech players, not just Apple, and stretches back for years [nikcub.com], though it obviously only just came to light in the last week or two when the images actually leaked into the general public)

  • Lame (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:36PM (#47864365)

    Square, less space than a Nomad. Lame

    • Re:Lame (Score:5, Insightful)

      by fortfive ( 1582005 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:58PM (#47865315)

      I get the joke.

      But the truth is, the thing is, in fact, lame. I had a nomad when the iPod came out. And my next device was an iPod. Because it was *awesome.* The interface was awesome, way easier to use in the car. It looked cooler. It was more portable. It had better sound quality and a better shuffle/random function.

      The watch I wear, when I wear one, is 60 years old. It tells accurate time, but it's largely a fashion accessory for me. I knew why I had, and wanted better, portable mp3 players. I have no idea why I want a computerized watch. The *only* use which as been at all seemingly valuable is that it might alert me to notifications I might miss when my phone is in my pocket. But I check my phone frequently enough that it's not really an issue for me.

      Now, when a watch can *replace* my phone, well, we'll really have something. As in, those holo-phone things in Star Wars. Even if the floating display was just 2D.

      Also, while I'm ranting, I'm sore displeased that both iPhone options are bigger. It's fine to have the big one, I get why people like that. But have the smaller one be truly smaller. Heck, I think the iPhone 5 is too big.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:38PM (#47864381)

    The new iPhone looks like a Samsung Galaxy. Considering I have been putting off upgrading my iPhone 4S till now, I'll be sure to express my indignation by asking the Apple Sales Genius about the new Galaxy 6 and how it compares to the Galaxy 6+. And every time they correct me, I'll look confused and say, "No -- that's clearly a Samsung Galaxy, you can tell by the rounded edges and the shape of the Main Button".

  • by ArcadeMan ( 2766669 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:41PM (#47864409)

    Whoever was in charge of the live stream are a bunch of amateurs, incompetent idiots and should be fired, publicity shamed and never hired again.

    Interlacing problems with the image, video looping, audio with no video, chinese audio on top of the english one, a stream so full of errors that it froze my Apple TV.

    I stopped watching and I'll try later tonight, after Apple has cleaned up that fucking mess. What a joke.

    I may be an Apple user and fanboy, but this time the Microsoft and Android fanboys can rip into Apple for this clusterfuck of problems, I'll be cheering for them.

    • It was amazingly bad (Score:5, Interesting)

      by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:18PM (#47864841)

      I would not have thought it was possible for a live video feed to go that bad. In addition to all the issues you mentioned, towards the end I had the video feed randomly flip between live content and content from an hour prior. It also froze for a while when the words "Image Stabilization" came on screen, a little too much stabilization!

      Bandwidth issues I could almost forgive, or at least understand. But the technical issues they were so technically awful it seemed like they hired a first grade class to do AV and fed them jello shots beforehand.

      Hope they can assemble a watchable video for viewing later, it was so bad you almost have to wonder if Chinese is not permanently embedded over Cook's voice in the master recording.

  • by Adambomb ( 118938 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:46PM (#47864457) Journal

    A gigantic set of the population is no longer even used to the concept of wearing a watch, because they have their phone. This device doesn't replace their phone. What exactly is the reason to have this as well, as opposed to pulling your phone out of your pocket?

    Unless some company comes up with a functionally independent wearable device that replaces the need for keeping your phone with you I do not see the appeal. I don't understand what the pitch is supposed to even be. Literally every functionality can be responded to with "but i have my phone right here, it also does that and better"

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:52PM (#47864523)

      How many people are wearing fitbits, etc, for fitness? There's a lot of advantage for the fitness and health monitoring stuff to having something on your wrist.

      Not to mention, for navigation, simple text messaging, seeing the time,... to be able to use 70% of the functional surface of your phone by glancing at your wrist is nice. Especially since women aren't allowed to have pockets and so the device is even harder to get to :P

      • by jfengel ( 409917 )

        That's kind of an interesting thought: a new market for storing your phone close enough to your device to work but not necessarily accessible.

        My first thought was a kind of belt; I use something like that to hold my phone when I run. But that would ruin the line of most dresses.

        Next thought... a garter? It wouldn't fit under close-fitting pants but it would fit under a dress. It could even be a kind of fashion accessory, in a "Oops, I showed you my phone, how naughty" kind of way: make it frilly or colorful

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by godawful ( 84526 )

      No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.

    • by gstoddart ( 321705 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:56PM (#47864569) Homepage

      Believe it or not, some of us still wear watches every day.

      At any given time, I might have to track down where in the house my phone is. I also know I can go swimming in any of my watches and they'll be just fine.

      So, I want neither the smart watch, nor to be tethered to my phone all the time.

      I had lunch with a former co-worker a month or so ago ... and the first thing I noticed was he was wearing a Samsung smart watch. He seemed to think it was great and that he could be quite far from his phone. I couldn't see the point.

      Some of us geezers will still continue to wear watches which don't do anything related to our phones.

      But, hey, buy whatever toy floats your boat, it's not a one size fits all thing.

      Me, when I'm actually wearing a shirt and tie, I'll stick with one of my old fashioned automatic skeleton watches or a spiffy chronograph.

      Maybe one of these days I'll learn to tie a bow tie and get one of them fancy tweed driving caps. ;-)

      • Maybe one of these days I'll learn to tie a bow tie and get one of them fancy tweed driving caps. ;-)

        Unless you're going someplace where people know what a real bow tie looks like, everyone is just going to think that your "bow tie" is falling apart.

    • A gigantic set of the population is no longer even used to the concept of wearing a watch, because they have their phone. This device doesn't replace their phone. What exactly is the reason to have this as well, as opposed to pulling your phone out of your pocket?

      The phone is big and needs to be unlocked to view texts/emails. I started wearing a watch again after 10 years without because I got tired of pulling my (dumb) phone out of my pocket. It's also a way for people who wish to be seen using Apple products to be seen using Apple products.

    • by Black.Shuck ( 704538 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:09PM (#47864713)

      In a few iterations the Apple Watch will be untethered from the phone, have decent storage, and a slimmer form-factor than the monstrosity that was unveiled today.

      In a world of tablets, smartphones and smartwatches, dedicated music-players are starting to look rather "quaint".

    • by kamapuaa ( 555446 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:12PM (#47864735) Homepage

      Because right now, Apple faithful only need a single iphone. If it was possible, Apple would love to sell them a second iphone for their other hand, but that doesn't quite work due to usability issues. This technology boldly allows people to have an iphone for both their left and their right hand.

    • Tight pants (Score:5, Interesting)

      by oneiros27 ( 46144 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:15PM (#47864783) Homepage

      Have you seen what people are wearing these days?

      This is so they can check what time it is without having to attempt to extract their new, larger phone out of the pocket of their skinny jeans, and then try to put it back in again.

      Where it'd actually be cool is if it had a 'lack of proximity warning' ... eg, an alert of 'hey, you left your phone' when the two get out or range of each other. Not that it would justify the price (or switching to an iPhone), but it'd be kinda cool, as I just realized I left my phone in my car.

      • by fnj ( 64210 )

        without having to attempt to extract their new, larger phone out of the pocket of their skinny jeans

        Miss, may I help you with that?

    • by rasmusbr ( 2186518 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:18PM (#47864831)

      What exactly is the reason to have this as well, as opposed to pulling your phone out of your pocket?

      Unless some company comes up with a functionally independent wearable device that replaces the need for keeping your phone with you I do not see the appeal. I don't understand what the pitch is supposed to even be.

      I believe the pitch goes something like this: In a world populated by very lazy and impatient people, the Apple watch allows you to get much of the functionality of your phone without pulling your phone out of your pocket. It also has an Apple logo on it.

      • The watch doesn't seem very feminine, but it makes me think about how women's clothing often has nonfunctional pockets, so phones are stashed in purses where they are considerably less convenient.

        I also immediately think of situations where I'm phoneless, such as when I'm swimming, or I'm carrying stuff (easy to turn wrist, hard to dig out of pocket), or I'm just wearing something that doesn't have pockets even though I'm not a woman, or even while I'm using the phone for something else like talking with so

    • by sribe ( 304414 )

      I don't know about that. I see the argument, but, the whole "I'll just pull my phone out of my pocket" argument seems to me like it might only be accurate 90% of the time, for nearly everybody. So, how many people will buy it for that 10% of the time?

      For instance, when I'm skiing mid-week but staying available for work such that clients don't even know... When my phone rings, just pulling it out of my pocket to check who's calling is actually kind of a pain in the ass--depending on temp and what gloves I'm

    • by Anubis IV ( 1279820 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:37PM (#47865043)

      I'm a major Apple fan, and even I don't understand what the pitch is supposed to be. It does do some things differently or better than the phone, and it also does some things the phone can't do at all (e.g. measure your heart rate throughout the day), but by and large, I just don't get it yet.

      It kinda reminds me of the iPad, where you could tell that they thought they had something special, but that they hadn't yet figured out what all it could do or why it would appeal to people. The advertising focused more on the emotions and feel of the device, rather than on specific use cases. A year later, and the ads were more focused, as was the language they used to describe it in keynotes and other communications.

      I think they believe the same thing is true here: they believe they've created something different that developers can use as a platform to make all kinds of cool new things using the cool new sensors it has, but they don't know what those things will be. But they're clearly excited by it, so maybe they know something I don't.

      I get the sense that I'll either need to get my hands on one or else listen to a lot of people who have their hands on them before I'll have any concept at all of whether or not it even might serve a purpose in my life. The most exciting feature for me was mentioned in a throwaway line right at the end of the keynote, where they rattled off a handful of random uses some of them have had for it, and mentioned controlling an Apple TV from it: something other devices can already do, of course, but I'd love to see a watch that can interact with smart devices around the home (e.g. locking and unlocking doors, turning on/off lights, dimming the lights when I sit down in the media room, etc.), including something like my media center. But I don't know which, if any, of those things it can do or will be able to do in the near future.

      As things stand now though, it's definitely a, "Well, that's neat, but *shrug*" for me.

    • by sootman ( 158191 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:37PM (#47865049) Homepage Journal

      What is exactly is your threshold for when a product should be created? That it does everything? That everyone likes it? Apple will sell METRIC SHITLOADS of these and do just fine, thankyouverymuch.

      MOST Apple products are a little overpriced and underspecced upon release. Look at the original iPod -- it was indeed expensive, had no wireless, and "less space than a Nomad." Then it TOOK OVER THE WORLD. The MacBook Air was a little slow and $1699 or $1799 at launch, and then OH LOOK, the WHOLE PC INDUSTRY tried to copy it with the whole "ultrabook" thing, and by the way Airs start at $899 now.

      So yeah, the first batch will be sold to people who are willing to spend $349 to see texts without digging out their phone. Then they'll get cheaper, more powerful, and more useful over the next few years. There is LOTS that could be done here. Maybe they'll create the pico-SIM and you'll be able to use it without your phone, and they'll push telcos into supporting it for free since it uses so little data. Etc etc etc. THIS IS JUST REV ONE. Stay tuned. And if you don't like it, don't buy it. Get a pebble or a moto or a samsung or whatever. Or don't. Apple will do just fine without you.

      And finally, "a gigantic set of the population" DOES still wear watches. Apple became the most valuable company in the world JUST A FEW YEARS after introducing the iPhone, the original target of which (as announced by Steve Jobs at MWSF, January 2007) was just 1% of the phone market. A product at which Steve Ballmer famously laughed. Don't worry about Apple. They'll do OK with 1% of the watch market, too.

    • by Bogtha ( 906264 )

      What exactly is the reason to have this as well, as opposed to pulling your phone out of your pocket?

      I'm not inclined to wear a watch either, and I'm going to get one. My reasons are:

      • As you said, the alternative is pulling your phone out of your pocket. It's more convenient looking at your wrist, especially with the larger iPhone sizes. Ever had an extended iMessage group chat? It's a hassle looking at your phone every minute. Also, when you're going for a run, the difference between looking at
  • Disappointing (Score:4, Interesting)

    by khellendros1984 ( 792761 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @02:53PM (#47864543) Journal
    I'm not a giant Apple fan, but one thing that I actually liked about their strategy up to this point was keeping their phones smaller. I've had a 4.7" phone, and that was almost too large for my (admittedly small) hands. I've got a 5" screen now, and it's notably difficult for me to use. I'm pessimistic about my future upgrade options at this point, if even Apple is jumping on the mega-sized-phone bandwagon.
  • Hot Damn! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lophophore ( 4087 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:06PM (#47864685) Homepage

    They've caught up with last year's Nexus 5!

    • Apple never has been ahead of their competition based on raw technical feature.

      Apple wins by taking the modern features that have been proven and implement them in a way that is either unique or better perfected.

      Any company and make a phone by placing a faster processor, and a bigger/higher resolution screen. However the details are what makes it a device that you play with for a few days and no longer use (like my old Palm-pilot 3 that I have, mostly due to the fact it didn't have a rechargeable battery).

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:24PM (#47864897)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • A 120+GB solid state iPod is way past due. No, I don't want an iPhone. No, I don't want to stream (and pay for that bandwidth).

  • by Jupix ( 916634 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:24PM (#47864909)

    I don't think they mentioned official battery capacity or battery life numbers, but they did say "very easy to charge at night". That tells me it has 1 day of battery just like the Moto 360.

    Honestly, the battery is the worst part of smartwatches currently. It ruined the Moto 360 for me and it comes close to ruining to Apple Watch, if it actually is only 1 day.

    I would settle for 3 days, my Sony sw2 goes 4 days without charging. I was expecting the same from Apple, looking at the criticisms of the Android Wear watches which are all focused on the 1-2 day battery life. I don't want to charge a watch every night!! I get it, it has a nice screen and it's slim, and it's running a lot of sensors and wireless transactions, but still... just awful battery life!

    • They're not launching until 2015, so I think basically they're hedging their bets that they might be able to get a slightly better battery in 6 months than they can right now. It's very much like Apple to play their cards close to their chest in instances like this. They won't be able to say how long it lasts for a few months because they literally don't know, and they won't make up numbers that haven't been validated in some way.

      However long it lasts, though, it's not long enough. I'd want 5 days, minimum.

      It's a pretty piece of jewellery, though. On that front, they're at the front of the class again.

    • by Bogtha ( 906264 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:39PM (#47865709)

      I would settle for 3 days

      I think this is just the 80/20 split. Almost everybody goes home and sleeps almost every night. For the vast majority of cases, taking your watch off to charge it once every three days is no better than taking your watch off to charge it every night. And the tradeoff to get to three days is either a) a battery three times larger, b) a watch that is three times more power efficient, or c) lesser capability. A three day battery life isn't worth the sacrifices you'd have to make to get it.

      I don't want to charge a watch every night!!

      Why? What's so much better about taking your watch off every three nights instead of every night?

  • by _xeno_ ( 155264 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:28PM (#47864947) Homepage Journal

    I only saw one brief bit of the stream, and it was where Steve Jobs Wannabe (Tim Cook?) was explaining how no one used camcorders any more because the iPhone could take better video. Which leads to the obvious question: does the iPhone have a replaceable battery and removable storage yet?

    Because I still have a camcorder hanging around and I use it when I want to take a video that lasts longer than a couple of minutes. The entire reason I have my camcorder is so that I can take two hour videos. Then, when the battery dies, I can swap it out with a new one. And if I manage to run out of storage space, I can swap out to a new SDXC card.

    Can't do either of those with an iPhone, making it a toy at taking pictures and video. Which is, to be fair, frequently fine. But Faux-Steve-Jobs's idea that the iPhone can replace a camcorder is just hilarious without those two very simple features.

    • by praxis ( 19962 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:58PM (#47865319)

      There are various purposes for various tools. A phone (Apple or otherwise) is not going to replace a proper camera for recording in situations in which you know you need massive storage, massive battery life or professional optics. You likely will also need good lighting and sound, but that's going beyond a camera now. What a phone does do well in, are situations where you had not planned on taking video. A camera you can carry everywhere that's good enough for many applications is the major use case and why dedicated photography and videography equipment is relegated more and more to situations that warrant it.

      When my toddler is going to take his or her first steps, I might not be ready with a full recording setup, but I will have a phone at hand, for example.

      If I am planning on recording my teenagers graduation, I will bring dedicated equipment that can record for hours at better resolution, for example.

      Clearly the iPhone will not replace a camcorder, but it will serve as a suitable replacement for a camcorder in many situations. The market trends seem to support this view.

  • by Lobais ( 743851 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:30PM (#47864961)

    The Slashdot post I was expecting[1] ;-)
    [1]: http://slashdot.org/story/01/1... [slashdot.org]

  • by purpledinoz ( 573045 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @03:31PM (#47864971)
    I don't see a new 4" iPhone 6 in the lineup, did they just abandon this size? It's interesting that Apple is now following the trend, rather than making it. All the iPhone users I know say that they would hate 5" phones because they're too big. Now it seems they have no choice. Although I prefer a 5" screen, I could imagine people would prefer to give up a bigger screen for a smaller phone.
  • by DrXym ( 126579 ) on Tuesday September 09, 2014 @04:13PM (#47865495)
    Apple have launched a smart watch which is technically indistinct all the other smart watches.

    All smart watches suck. They suck for being tied to a phone. They suck for being tied to specific phone OS and models. They suck for their battery life. They suck for their displays which turn off to save battery. Maybe if someone was upgrading from a fitbit or similar they'd be useful but I just don't see the mass market appeal in these things until they fix these issues.

  • Apple is solidifing their fashion brand appeal, no doubt about it. This is their single largest feat within the last 1,5 decades: They've managed to become the only tech company in the world that factually is a fashion brand in broad perception and a tech brand with a professional reputation. Brilliant, that's what.

    Sad thing they've been pissing of us opinion leaders with golden cages and lock-in in recent years. I just bought my first non-apple device in 8 years - a refurbished Lenovo ThinkPad. Couldn't say I'd by an Apple computer again. They're still good, Maveriks, hw integration and all, but having to sigh up just to get the FOSS compilers and all just doesn't scrub the right way with me.

    My 2 cents.

A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable. -- Thomas Jefferson

Working...