I still do, and I still mantain an open source Twitter client replacing the official one (no longer supported, as most apps on the platform). Q10, best phone I've ever had
I'm one of those guys, I still use a Q10 (OS10 family) as my daily driver. I felt in love with its ux e.g. the hub which acts both as notification center and timeline, full gesture-based navigation (back in 2013!) and an app permission system which allowed you choose which one should be granted to the app (again, back in 2013! Android had to wait years before this was implemented)
Apps are scarce, many don't work anymore due to obsolescence, but the main ones are there: I mantain a Twitter and a Twitch app, and keep updating them to follow Api changes. Spotify and Whatsapp can be used through the android layer, the native BB maps are still functional. Another nice guy on Crackberry mantains a youtube app.. I feel I can say that if you don't have many requirements it's still a solid phone, it can't do much but what it does it does well.
As a sibling post says - I also still believe its UX and likely current responsiveness is better than anything out there now.
I would probably still use webOS if there was still minimal open source development, some phone to put it on (or I guess I’d be fine getting a Pre 3) and the App Store not being shut down with all apps gone. The homebrew apps weren’t really meant to replace the App Store if I recall.
A world where webOS has 5-10% market share as a stable 3rd place would be amazing.
A I miss my N9, in fact I would still be using it if the battery hadn't failed suddenly. The story behind axing the N9 still makes me shake my head, how could that have been something else than MS planting a trojan horse at the top of Nokia to take over their mobile business. The incompetence or malice displayed by Elop still makes me shake my head to this day.
Hello fellow q10 fan! Small question: if someone were to start a company to maintain q10 and q20 devices, how valuable would that be to you at a monthly subscription rate?
I do not want to see these devices fall into obsolescence, and they are simple/old enough you could reverse-engineer the parts or get in touch with the asian companies who did some of the production runs for RIM.
I can safely say that you can't make money out of this platform anymore, the user base is just too small. If I had to live with the donations coming from my apps for BB10 well, let's say I would have already starved to death ;)
Not the original poster, but I have a hard time imagining you'd be able to meaningfully maintain the OS and integrated software (e.g. Hub, supported TLS versions for mail, etc.) via "mods" of any kind.
What _might_ be useful and actually possible would be an up-to-date maintained "rebuild" / "rewrite" of the native browser app, since there you can vendor pretty much all the important components you need.
I held on to my Q10 for a long time. That feeling of being able to type text with one hand because of the physical keyboard was so awesome. Alas, I finally had to drop it when an application I basically couldn't live without stopped supporting BB platform and I needed the latest version of that App.
> Regulations are legal acts that apply automatically and uniformly to all EU countries as soon as they enter into force, without needing to be transposed into national law. They are binding in their entirety on all EU countries.
And:
> Public authorities in EU Member States have the main responsibility for the application of EU law.
I knew the citation, but thank you anyways. When you actually try with the local court you'll find out it's not as clear cut as it is on the EU website and the local court will adhere only to local codified law. My country's government is in opposition to some of regulations and the courts can't do anything about it.
Yeah, there is some procedure with this court and the government going on regarding a single issue, other issues are waiting in queue. It has been 5 years and still nothing. Note that a person/corporation can't sue to this court.
"any person or company who has had their interests harmed as a result of the action or inaction of the EU or its staff can take action against them through the Court"
> Germany is run by a Christian political party. In addition to no longer being able to advocate for Nazi politics in Germany, now you cannot speak about certain facts that have occurred in the past
Small explanation for people not introduced to signals theory:
Fourier transform is the decomposition of an arbitrary signal into many sinusoids, such that their sum gives a signal identical to the starting one. Each of these sinusoids can be represented using Euler's formula as e^(i * omega * t). You can see that the exponent is purely imaginary.
There is a generalization of this transform (i.e. this transform is a particular case of a more general one): what if instead of a purely imaginary exponent we use a generic complex value a+ib?
Then e^((a+ib) * t) = e^(a * t)e^(ib * t): the new term that appears is a real-valued exponential, so exponential curves can also be used describe the starting signal!
However, making a discrete-time, sample-based algorithm of this transform is tricky, and the corresponding inverse transform (the "sum" of the components to get the starting signal back) didn't exist before
I'm having a hard time understanding why it's called "chirp". The basis signals aren't chirps (a signal that if you reproduce as sound, sounds like a bird chirp. Frequency increases in time.)
And is there a finite orthogonal basis for the z-transform (of a finite length signal), even?
If I remember correctly, the motivation for the z-transform is that more functions have the transform defined for the z-transform than for the DT Fourier transform. And you less often need generalized functions (Dirac deltas, and their derivatives). But there is no place in which z-transforms show up in signal processing computations, I thought. Since then signals are finite-time and there isn't a need for the convergence benefits of the z-transform.
Why is reversing the transform hard ? It's just about computing back values by following the transform definition, it should be even easier than doing the original transform.
Unless the hard part is doing that
1. Fast
2. with Discrete values
3. inverse discrete transform( discrete transform( discrete values ) ) should be almost equal to discrete values with high accuracy
Each of these is certainly a complication, for example standard discrete-time Fourier transform is O(n^2) while the Fast Fourier Transform algorithm manages to do the same in O(nlogn), but I think the main difficulty here is that the direct transform is an integral (or series, depends if you're using continuous or discrete one) over time, which is a single real variable. The inverse is an integral over the complex variable, a+ib, and you need a whole 2D plane to represent it (the complex plane indeed), a single 1D line is not enough. So how do you take an integral of a complex value over a 2D plane? And here you start delving deep into theorems and convergence regions.. stuff that's quite difficult to grasp without having experience with complex calculus (and I don't)
The inverse fourier trasnform, on the other hand, is limited to the imaginary axis of the complex plane (the exponent is a purely imaginary number), so you're restricting it to be monodimensional, hence the relative simplicity in reversing the transform
Also, keep in mind that all of this assumes you have infinite samples, so you need to use some form of windowing which doesn't distort too much the signal
Doing it fast and accurately is the hard part. This paper touches on some of the numerical accuracy improvements they made to the algorithm to help out. It involves some rather large numbers, so numerical accuracy of the floating point calculations matters.
Yep. My guess is that they're making clear the Model S is on a higher tier than Model 3 by giving it even more autonomy for a lower price. Understandable move since M3 is known to have eaten up some sales of both S and X
> Enthalpy is basically the relationship between volume, pressure and temperature
I appreciate the non-technical approach to the subject, but this is false. Enthalpy is an energy, it accounts for both internal energy (heat) and work.
Enthalpy is energy required to create a system. Internal energy required to make up the system (to bring it's internals to given Temperature, pressure ect), but there is additional work needed to position the system in the universe (that is, to free some space for it, like moving (working on) water or air to place the system of volume V in it).
I still don't get one thing: how could the attacker port OP's number without proving he owns the sim? Where I live (in EU) it's mandatory, isn't it the same in the US?
They might have an accomplice within carriers' or dealers' employees. Imagine how many shops are there across the country and how many employees have access to reissuing SIM cards. As an excuse such an employee can always say that they didn't notice that the documents were fake.
at least in germany ordering new sim cards to new addresses your provider never heard of before was a thing some years ago. I think porting a number is a lot easier if you know the detailed process though.
Here in Italy you must provide your ID card and wait a couple days for the carrier to check the data. Goverment websites even use 2fa as a proof of your physical identity
Why is it so common for some people to use "EU"/"Europe" when talking about a quirk about their country? Americans do it too, though the states are far less unique than countries.
