Thursday, June 26, 2014

Google I/O 2014 Keynote Highlights

Google I/O is an annual developer-focused conference held by Google in San Francisco, California. Google I/O features highly technical, in-depth sessions focused on building web, mobile, and enterprise applications with Google and open web technologies such as Android, Chrome, Chrome OS, Google APIs, Google Web Toolkit, App Engine, and more.

Google I/O was started in 2008. The "I" and "O" stand for input/output, and "Innovation in the Open".

Google I/O 2014 is being held at the Moscone Center, San Francisco.

Watch the below Video to see the Highlights of Google I/O 2014 Keynote.

You can subscribe to our Email posts, and you can subscribe to our blog feed.
Read more ...

Tuesday, June 24, 2014

Why Microsoft is using Android OS in its "Nokia X2" phone?

Recently Microsoft unveiled a low cost smartphone "Nokia X2", targeting Emerging market Countries like India, China, Russia and Nigeria.

Nokia X2 is provided with a 1.2GHz dual-core Snapdragon processor, a 5MP camera, a big screen (4.3-inch display), dual-sim, and 15GB of inbuilt storage space.

It is coming in various colours like green, orange, black, yellow and grey.

Nokia X2 will compete with dual-SIM models like Moto G, HTC Desire and Samsung Duos.

And, interestingly Nokia X2 is powered by Android OS. Everyone was surprised as Microsoft opted Android OS instead of its own Windowsphone OS.

Although the Nokia X2 is running Android, the OS has been heavily modified to look more like a Windows Phone interface.

Anyway, it is big surprise to see Microsoft preferring Android instead of its own OS.

This Reddit discussion is giving some insights about Why Microsoft is using Android OS in its Nokia X2 phone

Mostly they are highlighting two things in the disucssion. One is, Nokia might have developed this phone with Android before the Microsoft acquisition. Second is, Microsoft is trying to attract the Android fans, and it may force them to WP in future.

Find below the comments made in this discussion.

My understanding is that it's mostly for emerging markets. The phones have generally been lower spec devices than what you'd get with a phone running wp81 and the cost is also lower as a result.

Personally I think it's a bad business decision for MS, even though I'm actually a big Android fan. If MS wants to compete in third world markets, they need to optimize Windows Phone OS to work on low end hardware, just as Android has done with its KitKat release.

But the phone was in the works at Nokia long before MS' acquisition, so it may be a question of the right arm not quite yet having control of the left arm, if you know what I mean.

I think it is to turn people on to the MS way of doing things, I think my next phone might be a MS phone if they can come out with something with a huge screen. While still an android phone it looks and behaves like windows. Get used to the style and maybe switch at their next upgrade.

Its for people who use google services or an app that they can't get on windows phone, but they still want the experience of having wp8. The hope is they start to use microsoft services instead of google's, this would then make them more likely to buy a wp8 device in the future.

Nokia was apparently already working on it before the merger. Now that you have this asset, what would you do with it? In theory, you could just throw away that work. But the more strategic minded could probably make use of just about any asset as a tool in their grand plan - whatever it happens to be.

Maybe it's a classic bait and switch - come for the Android apps, stay for the MS interface (and other stuff).

Maybe it's meant to ease the transition to the WP-world for Android-addicts - calm fears of lacking apps, while at the same time serving as temptation to try full WP. Seems MS saw that Apple won the sprint, but was eventually passed by Google in the marathon, and whichever companies are relentless enough, they may just run forever.

(And if there's any company with the software chops to wrest control of the most popular Android fork away from Google, it would probably be MS.)

What is your thought about it? Share your thoughts thro' comments.

You can subscribe to our Email posts, and you can subscribe to our blog feed.
Read more ...

Sunday, June 1, 2014

Comments for the Google Self-Driving Car

Few days back, Google had unveiled prototype of its own self-driving car which is not having Steering Wheel, Pedals and Brakes. This Google Car can be driven at 25 mph speed.

In United States of America, as of now, four states (California, Nevada, Florida and Michigan) allow self-driving cars on their roads as long as a human driver is in the car at all times.

Watch below the Video of Google Car.

Google's this driverless Car is getting various comments in Social Media and News Media. Let us see of the interesting comments about this innovative Car from Google.

Let us first see the comments made by the viewers in Youtube and Google+ after viewing this Video.

heh, its cute.
I'd buy it, once I'm sure the kinks are worked out.
but the price is what will matter the most. This needs to be "Model T" cheap to make any sort of difference.

Meeting gone Google, documents gone Google, presentations gone Google

Now Transportation gone Google

I'd take one as it is now because the risk of injury is so far less than driving a car my self and I've been to professional driving school (drifting, stunts, etc.).
The computers on the car monitor hundreds of objects and it can detect a potential accident far in advance of the human minds amount of time to begin to notice one a second before it happens. The car is able to react and slow down or stop if it notices an accident is possible, like an SUV about to run a stop light when the auto car has the green light, it would come to a stop and wait for the SUV to go through whereas the human driver would have been at the stop line still going 30mph before noticing out of the corner of their eye the SUV smashing into them.

Having these on the road WILL save lives guaranteed even if sharing the road with non-automated cars.

This is ridiculous. More technique the higher the risk of malfunctions and system errors. And in time people will forget how to drive and there would be useless to get one of the most exiting things to get.. A driving licence.

And how does a car without breaks stop it self? Is it suppose to stop accelerating and then just roll on and let the tire friction eventually put it to stand still and if it wont manage to stop in time before you pass by your destination then you have to jump out the door or what??

Will never take off, would be to expensive, why would you want to take the fun out of driving?

what is the point of owning a car if you aren't going to drive it? Okay, maybe people who own a cheap stupid car will disagree, but...

If everyone has driverless cars, how will my Police Department be able to issue traffic citations? It accounts for over 58% of the PD's revenue where I live. How will my insurance company stay afloat if there are too few accidents to warrant current insurance rates?

It looks like a cheap toy or disabled person car, the design is horrible.

Now let us see some comments about the Google Car from News Media.

The verge has reported that "Google's car could be the best thing ever for privacy on the road. Ducking the police may be a lot easier in the future"
And, it raises below questions also.

Will Google target ads to drivers based on where they roam?
Will companies share your driving data with dubious marketers or sketchy data brokers? And what about the police? Will driverless cars be safe from the NSA?

The is raising questions about the control of the car. It says "Delighting people during a demo is great for a PR video, but the true test of design isn’t how it’s received by a hand-picked audience. The real test is in the reactions of regular people, stressed during the day, bored or hungry, grouchy during a long commute. And those same stresses prime other reactions: When someone is feeling low, how do they react when the car does something weird? When it lurches in traffic or when the occupant simply gets impatient and frustrated with traffic? And, if you want to get really concrete, how will you tell the car where to go? Will it be voice-powered? Will you have a say in route or speed or driving style? What controls will dictate that, and will they be usable in real time? "

According to General Motors Co., Google Inc. could become a “serious competitive threat” to the auto industry if it continues to push its self-driving cars.

The Guardian Says, The driverless car is to be welcomed for safety reasons, but who is at the wheel of the company's new vehicle? Why did Google have to make its prototype driverless vehicle look like a child's toy car? What does it mean? Are we to be children guided by Google-knows-best?

According to Cbc.Ca the most obvious beneficiaries of a self-driving car would be seniors or the disabled, who may not be able to operate a conventional automobile.

New York Times says that the Google Cars can travel with the speed of 100 miles per hours once they prove the safety.

What do you think about future of Google's Driverless Cars? Share your comments.

You can subscribe to our Email posts, and you can subscribe to our blog feed.
Read more ...

Search This Blog