Guest Vector Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 I learnt a song on how to pronounce it in Year 7 :lol: but i can't remember it :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TANKERx Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 A oes unrhyw un fan hyn yn gallu siarad Cymraeg? Can anyone here speak Welsh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Vector Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 i can a bit :lol: caci yn yr afon :lol: i think that should mean what i think it does :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TANKERx Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 Well, I won't be drinking any river water around Pontlliw! :D :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest vijay555 Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 This guy is blogging his wife's pregnancy via Tanager :lol: http://seanalex.textamerica.com/default.asp Yeash, next time i'm conception-ing, i'll blog it too, eh? ake for some great ringtones :wink: V Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Ron - No Longer a Mem Posted June 20, 2003 Report Share Posted June 20, 2003 I pointed out to Orange that "Picture messaging" would cause problems and confusion, as it equally relates to two totally different concepts. The reply I got referred me to a page in the system that dealt with MMS. Technically, "Picture Messaging" refers to embedding greyscale images in SMS messges (the reply rather proved my point, I thought!) Similar confusion here. We use "Picture Messaging" and "MMS" as if they were one and the same. They're not. "Picture messaging" is merely a tiny subset of the MMS standard, in the form that it's implemented by a number of carriers. The original specification allows for a wide range of different formats (still pics and videoclips) to be embedded and transmitted under the MMS protocol. The Telcos just happen to have chosen a lo-res format as their standard. Many fairly standard modern handsets therefore include cameras capable of creating and storing MUCH higher resolutions than conform to the usual MMS implementation. But, if the phone is capable of sending email-with-attachments, there's NO reason why these higher resolution pictures can't be sent by a mobile phone to a PC. MMS/Email with attached JPG file sent by GPRS... what's the difference? Mainly in the way they're billed to the customer! For further info, check Nokia's site and search on "MMS". (Not ALL former 156 TSR's are techno-muppets... Some of us knew our stuff, and did research in out own time!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HelloDave Posted June 22, 2003 Report Share Posted June 22, 2003 Aaaagh - don't start speaking Welsh - I used to go on holiday to Somerset, and we picked up S4C instead of Channel 4 so we got the delights of Pobol y Cym and Newyddion (or however you spell them). Watching someone spouting complete b***ocks in a language you don't understand does have a certain comedy value though :lol: While i'm on the subject - does Wales have a permanent Eistedfodd? That seemed to take up 95% of all S4C programming when I watched it. Getting back on topic...i love this bit Picture messaging proved a successful, quick and cost-effective method of transmitting images between colleagues for discussion. Cost effective? Not at 40p a message it isn't! Successful and quick? Depends on whether GPRS is having a good day or not! Surely it would be cheaper and more accurate to photograph the X-rays using a digicam, IR them to a phone and then e-mail the photo? Judging by the Nokia 7560 photos i've seen detail isn't anything to shout about, and the picture viewer on it takes aaaages to zoom in or out. The Welsh eh? :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Ron - No Longer a Mem Posted June 23, 2003 Report Share Posted June 23, 2003 I can claim to have seen , and tinkered with, something that few others here will have even heard of - Orange's videophone. It was designed "in response to specific customer request", and is around the size of a housebrick. Picture quality is murky at best, and the refresh rate laughable. Sales were almost in single figures - but it's still on the books. It enabled a BR field engineer to communicate with base and not just EXPLAIN what he'd found back to base, but also (in response to feedback from a more senior engineer) to show whatever details were requested in almost-real-time. Given that what he would have been looking at could be a section of railtrack that was on the point of failing, this gave the guy back at base (the guy with sufficient seniority to make potentially expensive decisions "on the hoof") the ability to work on several problems at once - problems separated by hundreds of miles, and possibly also miles from the nearest road. At the time it was developed (subcontracted to a university as I recall) it represented truly cutting edge technology. And it did what was needed. No WAY was it ready to be released into the retail market - it was heavy, "ruggedized", brick sized, and VERY expensive (both to buy and to run) The kind of resolution you need to make Mrs Bloggs of Bolton happy with her videopix of her holiday aren't the same as those required to decide if a piece of railway may be about to fail. Better quality would have been nice - but not strictly necessary: all that was required was enough evidence for head office to confirm the field engineer's diagnosis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now