Search This Blog

Thursday, 30 May 2013

A Sneak Peek into Windows OS with Leap Motion

Touch Screen is so yesterday!

By Leap Motion Blog | http://blog.leapmotion.com

Today we released a sneak peek of Leap Motion’s Windows functionality, one of the essential features we’re refining for our July 22 launch. This video shows how Leap Motion technology will work easily and seamlessly with Windows OS. 
With the Leap Motion Controller, you’ll be able to browse the web and interact with your computer just by moving your hands and fingers in the air. With Leap Motion technology and Windows, you can do everything that’s possible with multi-touch inputs — without actually touching anything. This also means that existing applications in Windows 7 and 8 will respond to your natural hand and finger movements. Soon, we’ll show you how Leap Motion will work with Mac OS X.
With the help of the developer community in our beta program, we’ll continue to refine this OS interaction as well as the innovative apps in Airspace. This program is in place to make sure the Leap Motion experience is what we’ve planned all along: to be the most intuitive, natural, and magical way to interact with your computer and to transform how the world interacts with technology. 

Windows XP and Office 2003 Comes to end-of-life

Notice from Microsoft Singapore:

On 8 April 2014, Microsoft will end support for its decade-old Windows XP. This means, you will no longer receive security updates, fixes or online technical support for PCs still running Windows XP SP3 and Office 2003.

The security and privacy implications of this event could have significant impacts on your business, so if you're running either of these products you should plan to take action soon. The potential implications of not doing so include:
·         Security threats
·         No one to call in the event of technical issue
·         Operational downtime
·         Reduced compatibility with software from other companies
You may have existing applications that run only on Windows XP. Let me assure you this is not a problem – Windows 8 has been built with a range of technologies that allow Windows XP applications to run seemlessly within Windows 8.

To avoid costly business downtime and security risks, we urge you to review your technology requirements and to upgrade your software sooner rather than later – deployments can take time and skilled technical resources may be in short supply in the final months of XP support. Using counterfeit software is certainly not worth the risk as research shows that fake software has extremely high levels of malware that expose organisations to increased security risks.

For the Singapore market,
Contact us for more information!
TEL: 6383 3833
EMAIL: sales@malifax.com.sg

Windows 8.1 leaks show off Start button, background talk surfaces

Herald the Start button's return!


By  | TechRadar.com
Windows 8.1 leaks show off Start button, background talk surfaces
Windows Blue bringing at least one thing back (credit: Windows SuperSite)

With less than a month to go before Build 2013, the attention on what Microsoft has planned has predominantly centered on Windows 8.1, a.k.a. Windows Blue.
Under the larger Blue umbrella is even more pointed talk of the return of the Start button, and today we may have a look at what the brand new button will look like, thanks to Paul Thurrott over at Windows SuperSite.
If you were holding back hope the Start button will indeed gallop triumphantly again to your screen, a look at these grabs may give you the jolt needed to take the leap.
Windows Blue Start button
Credit: Windows SuperSite
Look like the Start charm to you? Apparently, when users hover over the Start button icon, it changes color, taking on a black background and the flag logo's accent color. The Start button is said to be a permanent fixture of the internal Milestone Preview build of W8.1, but users may be able to turn it off at a later date.

There's more

Many of Thurrott's pronouncements were reported on/backed up by Mary Jo Foley over at ZDNet today as well.
According to Foley, for those tired of tiles, Microsoft will let them set an "All Apps" view as default, wherein selecting the Start button will pull up a list of apps as icons - not tiles - on the Start screen. Users will reportedly be allowed to arrange apps by usage, too.
In addition to the Start button - which Foley's source said will be invisible until users move their mice to the bottom left corner of their screens - Microsoft also plans to let users keep their desktop wallpaper as their Start background, thus eliminating the disorienting transition from one screen to the next.
Start button
Credit: Windows SuperSite
However, this feature must be enabled as it's off by default. Speaking of off by default...that boot to desktop feature is apparently in a default as well, though users should appreciate that it's there at all.

Tuesday, 21 May 2013

BlackBerry Live 2013


By Jason Lee | Malifax Technologies

AT THE EVENT What is new from BlackBerry



2013 will be an exciting year for BlackBerry with the announcement of plans for the rest of the year and beyond during the BlackBerry Live 2013 event in Orlando, Florida. The Canadian based company is reconnecting with its customers by the Keep Moving projects headed by BlackBerry Global Creative Director, Alicia Keys.




The General Session kicked off the event by providing insights into the future of BlackBerry; BlackBerry Enterprise Service (BES) 10.1, availability of BlackBerry 10.1 on BlackBerry Z10 devices, BlackBerry Q5 handset, BlackBerry Messager (BBM) Channels, BBM Cross-platform for iOS and Android devices and the amazing QNX™ technology that powers the new BlackBerry 10 platform.





The 3 day event also included Breakout and hands-on sessions, BlackBerry Jam General and Breakout sessions, BlackBerry Live Showcase, Jam Space and live interviews. There was also the Keep Moving experience produced by Alicia Keys at Universal Studios Florida for all the event attendees.


Thursday, 9 May 2013

Hospitals in the U.S. lose $8.3 billion using old technology

By Byron Acohido | USAToday.com




SEATTLE — U.S. physicians and hospitals are in the digital dark ages when it comes to using the latest mobile devices and Internet services to deliver patient care.
As a result, U.S. hospitals are absorbing an estimated $8.3 billion annual hit in lost productivity and increased patient discharge times, according to a Ponemon Institute survey of 577 health care professionals, released Tuesday to CyberTruth.
Hospitals continue to struggle with security and privacy concerns arising from the mainstreaming of social media at a time when federal rules carry the threat of steep fines for violating patient privacy.
The study, sponsored by tech security firm Imprivata, shows that clinicians waste an average of 46 minutes per day waiting for patient information. The main reasons: reliance on inefficient pagers, no Wi-Fi access, deficient e-mail and bans on use of personally owned devices.
That adds up to a productivity loss of $900,000 per year for the typical hospital — or more than $5.1 billion annually across the health care industry.
"The only industry that uses pagers pervasively is health care," Imprivata CEO Omar Hussain says. "Everyone else has moved to forms of communications that are faster and quicker."
Hospitals fritter away an additional $3.2 billion by continuing to rely on clunky communications systems as part of the patient discharge process. An estimated 37 minutes of the average discharge time of 102 minutes is due to waiting for hospital staff to respond with information necessary for the patient's release.
This lengthy discharge process costs the U.S. hospital industry $3.2 billion annually in lost revenue, the study found.
"If the technology was a little better and less restrictive, that's where the value add would occur," says Larry Ponemon, of the Ponemon Institute. "The goal is to maximize face time with patients. I think that could be achieved by having better technology."
Beaufort Memorial Hospital, a 197-bed facility in Beaufort, S.C., with a staff of 1,300, including 150 physicians, is a case in point.
The hospital recently implemented a secure-texting system that enables doctors and nurses to use text messaging on personally owned iPhones for business communications. The fix was simple: a Web application, downloaded from the Apple Store, that encrypts all messages and stores them in an archive that can be audited.
"The manufacturing and banking industries have been doing these things for a long time," says Edward Ricks, Beaufort's chief information officer. "These technologies aren't new. It's just that the culture for using them to improve workflows hasn't happened in hospital culture."
Beaufort also replaced its aging in-house network, in which doctors had to memorize multiple logons to access records in different departments. Today, the hospital uses a new "virtualized desktop" and "single sign-on" system. Simple computing devices are located in all rooms and at all nurses stations. Each staffer has a single logon to access records in different departments, and can do so from and device.
"We've seen a great improvement in workflows for physicians and nurses," Ricks says. "Folks will do the right thing if you give them the right tools."
The Obama administration has supplied a juicy carrot for others to follow suit. In 2009, President Obama signed into law the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act, allocating $19 billion to promote the wider use of electronic medical records.
Under a federal program referred to as "Meaningful Use," doctors can get reimbursed for demonstrating increased adoption and use of electronic medical records.
"Meaningful use is forcing the health industry to adopt new technologies to make more patient information available in real time and improve communications," says Hussain.
Sweeping change is not likely to happen overnight. Jeremy Delinsky, chief technology officer at Athenahealth, which supplies electronic medical record systems, notes that there is no infrastructure for physicians to easily share patient information.
Someone from, say, Boston, who falls ill while on vacation in Phoenix, would have a difficult time getting the family physician to send health records to the attending physician in Arizona. This could present enormous problems for patients with chronic conditions or complicated medical histories, he says.
"Health care is incredibly complex," Delinsky observes. "Technology innovators must contend with regulatory restrictions and run interference with insurance companies. These compounding factors make it very difficult to digitally advance the way patients receive care."

Tuesday, 7 May 2013

Productivity Future Vision (2012)

By Microsoft Office Videos

Watch how future technology will help people make better use of their time, focus their attention, and strengthen relationships while getting things done at work, home, and on the go. (Release: 2011)

Are we moving in that direction? 




Monday, 6 May 2013

BlackBerry Z10 and Q10 Video Reviews

By Engadget

BlackBerry Z10 Review



BlackBerry Q10 Review


Smartwatch or smartglass - which will you be wearing?


ANALYSIS The age of wearable tech hits the high street


By  | TechRadar.com


Smartwatch or smartglass - which will you be wearing?
Samsung is one of many tipped to produce a smartwatch

Unless you've somehow created a technological void or have stumbled upon this site through some kind of clicking frenzy, you'll know it's been a fascinating few years for portable technology.
There's an extremely high likelihood you could be reading this on a smartphone or tablet right now and as these all-in-one devices fulfill the gadget gaps in our day-to-day lives considerably well, you'd never have thought there would be a need to be any more personally connected than you already are.

Samsung already confirmed

If the rumours are to be believed then almost every major technology brand out there thinks this clearly isn't the case. Samsung - who shipped more smartphones than anyone else in the UK last year - have already confirmed they're working on a smart watch.
Of course, any modern-day rumour mill wouldn't be complete without a nod to Apple, who have filed a variety of patents that lend to the credence of a possible 'iWatch' arriving at some point later this year, if not sooner.
Smartwatch
Potential screens for the Samsung smartwatch
Lesser known brands have also taken the wearable market by storm such as Pebble with their smartwatch. Though not so independently intelligent as Google Glass or even Sony's smartwatch, Pebble was clearly seen by the 85,000 or so Kickstarter backers as something more plausible as an accessible entry in to the world of wearable tech.
Without a tether to a compatible Android or iOS device, the Pebble on its own isn't actually particularly smart - its capabilities are reduced to telling the time in a variety of fashions.
With Bluetooth connection to a smartphone though, the Pebble comes alive with a feed of notifications as well as returning intents to the smartphone of choice – such as control over music and many other possibilities - that no doubt developers will realise the full potential of once Pebble makes its way in to the hands of the masses, (many of the Kickstarter supporters are still waiting for their own to arrive).
Smartwatch
Google Glass is leading the charge
Google have already laid out their future wearables quite clearly with Google Glass. Though the project has split opinions on whether people actually want to wander around with a prop straight out of Star Trek on their face, the technology is incredibly alluring and enough to make us think we're truly living in the visions of the future laid out for us in films and TV sci-fi series for many decades.

Google in the lead

Google, however, are pretty much on their own when it comes to so-called smartglasses, other than the utterly uninspiring competitor product being touted by Vuzix. It's clear that even manufacturers are not sold on the idea that wearable tech could be so brazenly obvious and literally in your face.
A large portion of the group that Google has chosen for their #IfIHadGlass 'competition' are mostly part of the elite, celebrities, high-profile technology journos and ultra-cool extreme sports types that will no doubt have been hand-picked for their circle of influence.
Google is hoping that these folk can convince the average person that wearing $1,500 of advanced technology on their head is the way forward, but it's more likely that over the next couple of years it will just be considered the top-end in wearable possibilities and likely something that most people just aren't ready for.
iWatch
Can Apple hit back with the iWatch?
A smart watch, on the other hand (or wrist), costing a fraction of the current price-tag of Google Glass is much more appealing to the general public.
They could have a trendy wrist adornment supplying them with all the important stuff they need to be aware of without causing the social faux-pas of getting out their smartphone at the most inopportune moment.
Conversely, believing that colleagues, partners or bosses would be comfortable with us having a constant stream of distractions fed to our retinas in the form of some kind of headwear still seems a little far-fetched.
With the additional accessory of a high-resolution camera, the smartglasses become not only a potential privacy debate for tabloids to faun over but also something that will likely be banned in a variety of locations or institutions.

Smartwatches will be first to mass-market

So for now, smartwatch it is. The Apple iWatch, iWrist, iTime or whatever iNalogy they decide to call it will of course be incredibly popular.
It isn't going to be the cheapest of the wearables by a long way but Apple's intentions with the previous generation iPod Nano and wrist-strap accessories showed a glimpse in the direction Apple is likely to go.
It's difficult to see them making it as just an accessory to a smartphone akin to the Pebble, because as with every other portable device they've ever produced, it has to stand up on its own if it's going to be the consumer's device of choice for pouring money in to Apple's lap; indeed it could even be marketed as the 'Next iPhone'.
It goes without saying that Samsung will introduce something similar, likely at a cheaper price point than Apple, and many other brands such as LG will jump on the wagon right behind them.
If this year isn't, then 2014 will be the year of the smartwatch, when being concerned with details such as the time and date will be a minor function of whichever brand you choose.
You'll be wondering what you ever did without one and we can only hope that being head-down and glued to your smartphone will be replaced by scores of us checking our watches repetitively as if time had suddenly gained a whole new level of importance.

System on a Chip: what you need to know about SoCs


EXPLAINED The tiny technology that makes the Raspberry Pi possible


By from Linux Format Issue 168 


System on a Chip: what you need to know about SoCs
SoCs are the diminuitive little chips powering the mobile computing revolution

The Raspberry Pi is powered by a Broadcom BCM2835 System on a Chip. But there are millions of other devices, all powered by similar means.
Here we'll explain what an SoC is, what it does, and why they exist.
In very broad terms, a System on Chip is a microchip that has all the components required to power a computer. In the case of the Raspberry Pi, the Broadcom chip contains a 700MHz ARM processor and a Videocore 4 GPU.
Q. Are all SoCs so low on processing power?
A. Not at all. The RPi has different priorities than other devices that use SoCs. In fact, newer SoCs sport multi-core processors and GPUs.
Q. But so does my motherboard. How are SoCs any different?
A. First, there's the fact that on a motherboard the different components are housed in separate chips. So there's a CPU, there's a graphics processor, there's memory, and so on. On the other hand, a System on a Chip has all these components on a single chip, and is hardly any bigger than the traditional CPU.
Q. Ah! Is this the reason why the RPi is so puny?
A. Absolutely! A computer needs various components, and while a desktop has room to easily fit them all, it would be virtually impossible on a device like the RPi. Thanks to System on a Chip, we have powerful computers in a much smaller form factor, like a smartphone, with spare room for the batteries.
Q. And that's another advantage, right? These devices don't need a lot of power.
A. That's right, and this is thanks to the very tight integration of the components, which doesn't require much wiring; and this in turn makes these devices a lot more efficient. Take the RPi for example, which only needs 5V to run via the Micro USB type B. In fact, I powered mine using my smartphone's charger!
Q. So, besides the RPi and smartphones, are there any other types of devices that use SoC?
A. If a device fits in your hand and runs on batteries, chances are it's powered by an SoC. So, in addition to smartphones, tablets too are powered by SoCs. In fact, most of the popular Android tablets are powered by Nvidia Tegra 3 and Qualcom Snapdragon SoCs. Even the Microsoft Surface Tab will be powered by the Tegra 3 SoC.
Q. That's awesome! Talking of the RPi, when you mentioned its Broadcom chip, you said it's got a CPU and a GPU. So where's the memory?
A. Well, the revision 2 RPi uses 512MB of SDRAM, and it's stacked right on top of the Broadcom chip via a technology called package-on-package, or PoP.
Q. PoP? Sounds like a quick and cheap fix to a leaking roof.
A. You might be closer than you realise, at least in the quick and cheap sense. Sometimes, it's just not feasible to build an SoC for a particular type of device. On smaller devices, like the RPi and other popular open source hardware devices like the BeagleBoard, manufacturers save space (and money) by piling multiple chips, or "packages" as they'd like to call them, on top of each other.
Q. I'm guessing they don't just glue them on top of each other?
A. The SoC chips use a surface mount technology known as ball grid array. The SoC chips are lined with tiny interconnection pins on both the top and bottom. The manufacturers then solder the lower ones to connect the SoC to the board, and use the ones on the top to connect memory packages. This gives them more flexibility, as they can use the memory from different vendors. For example, some RPi boards have memory from Hynix and others from Samsung.
Q. Ok. So SoCs don't have memory?
A. No, I am not saying that. All SoCs aren't built the same. Some have more components than others, and stack additional components using the PoP technology. It all depends on the intended use of the device.
Q. So what else can you find inside an SoC?
A. Besides the CPU, GPU and the memory, an SoC can house the Northbridge, which is a component that handles communications between the CPU and other components of the SoC. Some SoCs also have the Southbridge, which handles various I/O functions. An SoC meant for a communication device will also include cellular and other radios for 4G, Bluetooth or Wi-Fi connectivity.
Q. In the same vein, can an SoC have non-ARM processors as well?
A. Yes they can. But most SoCs will be powered by an ARM processor. These processors are the preferred choice for SoCs because the ARM architecture delivers high performance without consuming much power, which makes them ideal for power-conscious mobile devices. In contrast, the x86 architecture, although popular on regular desktops, isn't as power efficient.
Q. But are there any x86-based SoCs?
A. Intel is the only manufacturer that has an x86-based SoC for mobile devices. It's called the Intel Atom Medfield. The first smartphone to use this was the Intel AZ210, known in the UK as the Orange San Diego.
Q. If SoCs take up less space, and consume less power, why aren't they everywhere?
A. That's a good question. As wonderful as SoCs are, the benefits come at a cost. Thanks to their tight integration, they lack the flexibility you'd want in a desktop or a laptop. So while you can upgrade your PC with a new CPU and GPU, and add more RAM, you can't do the same for your smartphone.
Q. Bummer. Does that mean SoCs have no use beyond mobile devices?
A. That'd have been true a couple of years ago, but not any more. Traditional CPUs are learning from SoCs and are integrating memory controller, PCI Express and a graphics processor onto the same chip. AMD's Llano and Intel's Valley View are prime examples. Meanwhile, mobile SoCs are becoming more powerful, such as Samsung's Exynos 5, which powers Google's Nexus 10 tablet as well as the latest generation Samsung Chromebook.
Q. Wow! Since the Chromebook runs Chrome OS, which is based on Linux, does it mean these SoCs all support Linux?
A. Well that's a loaded question, and it'll need some explaining. Like I said, a majority of SoCs have ARM processors, and many of these devices, like Android-based smartphones, tablets, and the RPi, run Linux. But it isn't a unified version of Linux. All these devices require a slightly different variation of Linux. In fact, maintaining the different ARM-based SoCs is a huge chore for the Linux kernel developers. As per some reports, every new kernel release has about 70,000 new lines of ARM code, compared with only about 5,000 for the x86 platform! However, starting with Linux Kernel 3.7, multiple ARM SoC platforms will be supported by the same kernel.
Q. So I guess in the near future I'll be able to install my favourite Linux distro on any ARM device.
A. We're headed there, for sure. The most popular devices with ARM SoCs that run Linux are the RPi and the Chromebook. Some people have even managed to dual-boot Chrome OS on their Chromebooks, along with full-blown distros such as Ubuntu and Fedora.
Q. I keep telling my mates that mobile devices are the future of computers. It would seem so are SoCs.
A. Absolutely, but there will always be a market for general-purpose CPUs, where power consumption and a small form factor are less of an issue. Think high-end servers and supercomputers.