The Lies of Net Neutrality: An Opinion Piece

Even by contemporary political standards, the debate about Net Neutrality has been clouded by an extraordinary amount of dishonesty. While legitimate arguments can be made in both sides, some common assertions are simply untrue. Furthermore, the people who are saying these deceitful things are often high-level bureaucrats or CEOs of internet companies who presumably should know better.

What is Net Neutrality?

The “default setting” of the internet is “neutral.” In theory, an end-user’s ability to download a PDF of his child’s school cafeteria menu is similar to that of downloading an ebook from Amazon. The end-user’s access is the same, in theory, no matter what the size of the website.

Internet Service Providers (ISP) sell internet access (bandwidth) to end-users, as well as to website owners. ISPs don’t like Net Neutrality and want to charge large content producers (such as Netflix) premium rates for higher-speed access to the their customers. This would create a “Fast Lane” model, in which the end user would experience slower downloads from smaller, less prosperous websites.

[layerslider id=”31″]

It is no surprise that ISPs hate Net Neutrality, while content producers are in favor of it.

net neutrality table

As you might imagine, when billionaires fight, lawyers get rich. After attempts to enforce Net Neutrality were overturned by court cases, the FCC adopted several historic regulations governing ISP behavior, including:

  • No blocking of legal content
  • No throttling of Internet traffic on the basis of content
  • No paid prioritization of content

The FCC clarified that these rules prevent ISPs from “unreasonably interfering with or unreasonably disadvantaging” the ability of end-users and content providers to connect with each other. Furthermore the rationalization of “reasonable network management” must “primarily be used for and tailored to achieving a legitimate network management–and not commercial–purpose.” In other words, ISPs can’t use corporate doublespeak to justify arbitrary bills on end-users, or throttling access to websites.

Although previous court rulings had overturned Net Neutrality policies, these new FCC regulations essentially maintain the status quo. Historically, the internet has grown and thrived in “neutral” conditions.

In the wake of the FCC rulings, the media has been deluged with a torrent of fraudulent information. Take the quiz below and see if you can spot which quotes or talking points are false.

1. “We are for net neutrality, but some services should be prioritized over others.” Deutsche Telekom CEO Timotheus Hoettges, New York Times

I thought I start off with an easy one. Hint: the above statement is like saying “I am for equal pay for equal work, but no woman should be paid as much as a man.”

2. “The Internet is not broken. There is no problem for the government to solve….The evidence of these continuing threats? There is none; it’s all anecdote, hypothesis, and hysteria.” Commissioner Ajit Pai, FCC Commissioner, fcc.gov

“Net Neutrality is unnecessary. It’s designed to solve problems that haven’t happened.” Talking Point.

 Let’s look at some “nonexistent” problems that have been reported by CNN:

  • Verizon blocked Google Wallet and PayPal phone applications. Presumably, it won’t block its own tap-to-pay product, Softcard.
  •  AT&T, Sprint,T-Mobile, and Verizon blocked or charged extra for tethering apps that make your mobile device a hotspot. Using Net neutrality reasoning, the FCC blocked these blocks.
  •  AT&T blocked FaceTime on Apple devices and Google Hangouts on Android devices.
  • Comcast throttled BitTorrent, legal as well as illegal content.

As FCC Commissioner Clyburn said, “This is more than a theoretical exercise. Providers here in the United States have, in fact, blocked applications on mobile devices, which not only hampers free expression, it also restricts…innovation by allowing companies, not the consumer to pick winners and losers.”

Bizarrely, anti-Net Neutrality FCC Commissioner Pai cites some of the above examples as “proof” that problems didn’t happened. He dismisses them as examples that are “picayune and stale.” I suspect that if he personally had been charged $20 a month for tethering a device, he would discover that one man’s “picayune” is another man’s “crime against humanity.”

 3. “The Obama Administration needs to get beyond its 1930s rotary-telephone mindset and embrace the future,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky, NPR.

“The FCC’s pro-Net Neutrality decision is based on 1934 law that was designed for outmoded technology.” Talking point pushed by ISPs.

In the first place, laws written for one technology are constantly being applied to newer ones. For example, the President couldn’t kick Rush Limbaugh off the air on the basis that “Freedom of the press” doesn’t apply to radio and television. Personally, I would love for Mitch McConnell to declare before the National Rifle Association that the Second Amendment was written for muskets and front-loading rifles, so it couldn’t possibly apply to modern weapons. Heck, I would pay money to see that speech.

[layerslider id=”31″]

However, the main problem with this talking point is that it is has a false premise.  The FCC Net Neutrally rulings weren’t just based on the 1934 law, but also the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and a 2010 court ruling, both of which specifically permit the recent FCC actions.

So, the people pushing this particular talking point are either lying or just plain stupid.  Hint: they’re not stupid.

 4) “Net neutrality has not been necessary to date. I don’t see any reason why it’s suddenly become important, when the Internet has functioned quite well for the past 15 years without it…Government attempts to regulate technology have been extraordinarily counterproductive in the past.” Peter Thiel, PayPal founder and Facebook  Wikipedia

“The Internet is not broken, and it got here without government regulation and probably in part because of lack of government regulation.” Max Levchin, PayPal co-founder. Wikipedia

“The Internet has thrived in the absence of net neutrality rules, thank you very much.”  Robert M. McDowell, a former FCC commissioner turned telecom lawyer in Washington, D.C. Wikipedia

The government created the Internet (Thank you DARPA). The Internet has always been regulated. If not for the early government oversight, we would have a byzantine patchwork of private internets that would be unable to communicate with each other. Furthermore, the FCC Net Neutrality rulings are not an attempt to impose new conditions, but are measures design to preserve the environment under which the Internet has prospered.

I’m not sure if the above quotes count as actual lies. People have very emotional beliefs about government regulations that cause them to say all sorts of strange things. Sort of like those folks who are fearful that the “Government is trying to take over Social Security!”

 5.“Net neutrality does not eliminate the Fast Lane. Lack of competition among the ISPs is the real problem.” Talking point.

Although this statement has been made to criticize the recent FCC rulings, it is actually true.

Fast Lanes currently exist. High end content and hosting providers add “nodes” to the “Backbone” of the Internet, i.e. they build hardware solutions to deliver their large volume of content. These types of Fast Lanes benefit everybody, because they increase the overall carrying capacity of the Internet. Net Neutrality bans the type of Fast Lane solutions in which the flow of content is artificially restricted.

Lack of competitions among ISPs is a real problem. For a more complete explanation of Fast Lanes and ISPs, see the excellent article by Robert McMillan in Wired.

6. “Net Neutrality advocates do not understand the Internet.” Talking point.

Among the people who testified in front of the FCC in favor of the Net Neutrality was Sir Tim Berners-Lee. Are we to assume that the man who designed the World Wide Web doesn’t understand the Internet? Another high profile supporter of Net Neutrality is Google.  They also do not understand the Internet?

What is especially annoying about this talking point (aside from the fact that it usually delivered in an arrogant, condescending manner) is that the more you know about the Internet, the more likely you are to be in favor of Net Neutrality.

The web designers, software engineers, IT guys, and all rest of the intellectual workers who support the Internet are a politically diverse bunch. However, they are united in their support of Net Neutrality.  It’s easy to see why.  Many have dreams of sitting in their garage or a dorm room, and building the next Facebook or Google. Without Net Neutrality, those dreams are ash.

7. “The recent FCC rulings open the door to taxing the Internet.” Talking Point.

This talking point is true. The FCC swears it won’t use this ruling to implement taxes, but more than a few people are suspicious of this promise.

This is a legitimate criticism of the ruling (unless you are in favor of taxing the Internet, but that’s another issue). Unlike most of the criticisms presented in this article, it actually informs the listener, rather than confuse them.

This is why I have deliberately chosen to use the inflammatory description of the other anti-Net Neutrality arguments as “lies.” These talking points are designed to deceive.

As has been pointed out by observers, ISPs often use very different arguments when addressing stockholders than the FCC. While they loudly complain of the economic hardship posed by these regulations, their stockholder letters are full of cheery optimism.

Even though I am in favor of Net Neutrality, I do think there are legitimate arguments to be made against it. Unfortunately, its opponents have chosen the route of propaganda, rather than education.

 8) Finally one last example:

“US Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) this week filed legislation she calls the ‘Internet Freedom Act’ to overturn the Federal Communications Commission’s new network neutrality rules.” Arstechnica.

Is the “Internet Freedom Act” an accurate name? What do you think?

 This post is the opinion solely of the author and does not reflect the positions of AMREL or its other employees. Comments can be mailed to editor@amrel.com (comments may be used in future postings).

[layerslider id=”31″]

Future Soldier Technology [VIDEO]

Recently, we took a gander at “Recon,” a TV show on ArmedForcesUpdate. Their episode on “Future Soldier” is a step above most Defense videos. In a relatively brief time, they cover exoskeletons, invisibility cloaks, small arms, sensor systems, brain-machine interaction, power sources, helmet technology, and body armor. The role of end-user feedback as well as cost, requirements, and basic challenges are also mentioned. Intelligent research scientists are prominently featured talking intelligently. Best of all, the hard-driving rock music, which is the bane of so many Defense videos, is only minimally present.

[layerslider id=”31″]

Rugged Android Tablet Previewed at PLRB 2015 Claims & Insurance Conference

AMREL will preview its new, rugged Android Tablet at PLRB 2015 Claims & Insurance Conference.

“AMREL is developing mobile computer solutions specifically for the insurance industry,” explained Linda Talcott, Director of Product Marketing. “We thought the conference would be a good place to showcase our new Android tablet, and get feedback about the industry’s requirements.”

AMREL poured 30 years of rugged experience into the new tablet. Its revolutionary design utilizes a unique, patented channeling system that adds an extra level of durability to the tablet.

“This is not the traditional clunky rugged device,” declared Ms. Talcott. “We applied lessons learned from aviation manufacturing. Like rugged computers, airplanes have to work in hostile environments and withstand shock, vibration, as well as extreme temperatures. However, airplanes are also sensitive to issues of weight. Using aviation manufacturing methods, we created a lightweight, mobile device that can withstand pounding.”

Ms. Talcott is quick to point out that rugged computers are not just for outdoor use, such disaster areas.

[layerslider id=”31″]

“People who purchase cheap, standard, commercial computers for the office are actually costing their enterprises money,” she said. “A rugged computer is more reliable, so it saves money on repairs, replacement, lost data, and worker downtime. A well-known study proved that the Total Cost of Ownership for rugged computers is less than for commercial ones. Rugged reduces risk.”

Like most AMREL products, the new tablet is designed for fast and easy customization. AMREL is well known for quickly delivering customized devices at low NRE, even for low volume orders.

In addition to the new Android tablet, AMREL offers a wide choice of handhelds and laptops. In addition to Android, AMREL’s offerings run on full Windows and Windows CE operating systems.

Ms. Talcott will be in AMREL’s booth # 376.

To learn more about AMREL complete line of rugged mobile computing solutions, visit: http://computers.amrel.com

The Confusing World of Smartphone Displays

Whenever I buy consumer technology, I feel stupid.  For example, when I shopping for a smartphone, and I ask about the different kinds of displays, a salesman  will reply with something like “IPS and TN are really just both TFT LCDs. For maximum color representation, you really want an IPS like they have on HTC, and LG.”  The salesman assumes that I know what he is talking about and I feel like I should understand what he is saying.

Displays are an important part of a smartphone, so we should have a basic knowledge of them.  Fortunately, Gizmado published an explanation.  The article below originally appeared in Gizmado as How Not to Be Wrong When You’re Talking About Smartphone Displays.

[layerslider id=”31″]

A lot of amazing engineering and design goes into making your smartphone. And smartphone displays are one of the most important parts — they’re your window onto the internet, and the world. But the technical terms we use to describe them can be pretty confusing. Here’s how to sound like you know what you’re talking about when it comes to displays.

If you’ve ever looked at a spec sheet, you know that exploring the world of mobile displays is like being force fed a choking helping of alphabet soup: OLED, AMOLED, LCD, TFT, TN, IPS, IGZO, RGB, RGBG, etc. Not to mention every company has its own proprietary display technologies and pixel layouts that are, of course, THE BEST.

But once you understand the details of what these various acronyms mean, you’ll find it’s not actually about “best” at all. Looking for the best smartphone screen becomes just a matter of preference, a delicate balance between performance and energy efficiency.

OLED and LCD

The easiest place to start is with OLED (organic light emitting diode) displays and LCDs (liquid crystal displays) because all flagship smartphones today use some version of these two technologies. It’s impossible to say if one screen technology is objectively “better” than another, but they both have distinct trade-offs. Ones that can effect the features your phone can offer.

You know Moto Display? That feature that serves up text messages and notifications frequently on the lock screen in an outline of black and white? On LCD screens—like the iPhone’s—a feature like this would be wildly inadvisable because it would absolutely destroy idle battery life. But it can work on Motorola’s AMOLED (active-matrix OLED) displays no problem.

How Not to Be Wrong When You're Talking About Smartphone Displays

Thanks AMOLED!

AMOLED and OLED are almost completely interchangeable. “Active matrix” refers to how each pixel is actively addressed by a transistor and capacitor. There is such a thing as PMOLED display (passive matrix), but it’s pretty much a dinosaur at this point so we won’t worry about it.

AMOLED displays and LCDs are powered very differently. LCDs use a backlight that delivers white light (in most cases) to the entire panel. This light passes through polarizing filters and a layer of liquid crystal to produce the image you’re seeing. Because this backlight is always on, light is still shining in areas even when backgrounds should be inky blacks. This means no matter what pixels are actually being used, the whole panel is still producing light.

Because of this, LCDs tend to be incredibly vibrant and have excellent color reproduction—basically meaning “they do colors good”—but suffer when you’re trying to look at the phone from a wide angle. They’re also bad at true blacks—instead they look more like a very dark gray because of that always-on backlight. There are ways to mitigate this stuff—like Nokia’s ClearBlack technology, which polarizes light differently and makes some other tweaks—but even the best LCD can’t best OLEDs when it comes to this stuff.

AMOLED displays, on the other hand, use a layer of organic material where each individual pixel is independently powered. This means the display selects what pixels draw power so features like Moto Display don’t eat up battery because black pixels are actually, literally off; they’re as black as can be and don’t draw power doing it. It’s this same trick that makes things like Samsung’s black-and-white low-power mode work.

That’s a fantastic feature—especially considering how important battery life is—but these screens come with their own disadvantages as well. Namely production costs. Wherever you read OLED, translate that into $$$. There are also reports of screen burn-in, where an image left on the screen too long actually burns into it. (Remember how you had to use screensavers on old displays? Like that but not as bad.) And since OLEDs are made of organic material, it can also degrade over time.

LCD Acronym Party: TN, IPS, IGZO, TFT, OMG

In the case of LCDs, there are a lot of jumble-letter subflavors—primarily TFT (thin-film transistor), IPS (in-plane switching), and TN (twisted nematics). Don’t freak out at all the letters just yet: IPS and TN are just two forms of TFT LCDs. IPS is generally the go-to for high-end computers, especially when you need accurate color representation and the best viewing angles. IPS displays are among the best to look at from a super-wide angle like “practically sideways.” Which makes them fantastic for things you’ll be looking at different viewpoints.

Apple’s iPhones have used IPS LCD displays since the iPhone 4 and similar ones have been widely adopted by Google, HTC, and LG, and other companies that make Android phones. TN displays, on the other hand, are pretty much out performed by IPS in almost every way except for how much they cost to make, so you’re most likely to only see these guys in older/cheaper smartphones.

Then there’s IGZO. Named for the semiconducting materials its made from (Indium Gallium Zinc Oxygen) IGZO is a technology that works on the something called the backplane, the part of display controlling all the pixels on your screen. It works with both OLED and LCD displays, giving devices better image quality and efficiency. DisplayMate, the go-to resource for absurdly science-y breakdowns on all display tech, says that the iPad Air saw a 57 percent power efficiency bump because of the IGZO LCD backplane. So bottom line, IGZO is generally just a bonus for whatever it’s attached to.

PenTile, Diamond, Quantum Dots, Retina, and other stuff

Samsung is one of the biggest pushers of OLED displays, and according to them, they’ve moved beyond your standard OLED offering to tech they call Super AMOLED displays, which is simply that the tactile part of the screen is baked into the display tech so it’s thinner. Weeeeee.

But Samsung backs another specific display technology known as PenTile, which uses a RGBG design instead of the standard RGB. This means that there are more green subpixels—the colored subsections that add up to make one single color-changing pixel—than red or blue. Also, because of a whole ton of really specific mumbo jumbo we wont get into, PenTile displays actually have less sub-pixels on the whole than a tradition display and are often more power efficient. The catch is that these screens have also been knocked for color fringing on icons and looking shittier up close.

Other companies have also used Samsung’s PenTile layout, including Nokia and HTC, but now almost all, even including Samsung, have pretty much ditched it. Samsung now uses what it calls a Diamond Pixel layout in the Galaxy S4 and S5 that, while still PenTile, resolves a lot of the tech’s problems. Now, in the pixel dense displays of today, PenTile or no PenTile is rarely an issue.

You may have also been hearing a lot about Quantum Dot displays. Although this tech is, for the most part, reserved for televisions, it could soon make its way to smartphones. Essentially, Quantum Dots try to clean up the backlight on LCD displays, and make the LCD’s behave a lot more like OLEDs, in a good way. I won’t get too deep into it since this tech hasn’t come to phones just yet, but know if QD is present, then you’re talking about an LCD display with some OLED-like behaviors underneath such as a wider color gamut, which generally means “a better LCD display.”

The final piece of vocabulary you’ve definitely heard of is “Retina.” The term Retina is an Apple-branded marketing term that basically translates to “you can’t see the pixels from a foot away.” Since it’s perception based, that makes it a relative term that changes on what device you’re talking about. For the iPhone 6 Plus it’s 401 PPI whereas the new 5K iMac it’s only 218 PPI. Prominent experts have refuted that claim, saying pixel counts should be higher, but basically Retina is Apple saying “this is the highest resolution your eye will recognize, so why go higher?” Which honestly, isn’t a terrible question when you get into energy trade-offs with higher resolution displays. Still, the problem with “Retina” is that since it’s such a vague term, it’s hard to make direct comparisons. In theory that doesn’t matter because “Retina” is designed to mean “good enough that getting better doesn’t matter” but it’s the least concrete of any screen-tech term you’re likely to hear.

Of course your screen is just one part of your phone, even if it’s one of the most important. And how your screen plays with the processor that’s pushing the pixels and the battery that’s powering them is more important than any screen tech can be on its own. But armed with a basic understanding of the techtalk you can have at least some sense of what you’re buying in terms of performance, battery life, and quality next time you are face to face with a spec sheet.

Thanks to Jordan Ellenberg, whose amazing book about math, How Not to Be Wrong, inspired the name for the posts in this ongoing series.

 

Media Center

Press releases, images, product datasheets, and news, as well as solutions for biometrics, night vision, avionics, and fiber optics

AMREL launches line of fully rugged displays

AMREL announces the launch of MOJAVE, a complete line of fully rugged displays. Display sizes include 10”, 15”, 19”, 22”, 24”, 40” and 46”.

Ruggeddisplays“Many of our clients have been asking for them,” explained Kalvin Chen, AMREL’s Vice President of Operations. “Since we do a lot of customizing, we are very sensitive to our customers’ needs.”

With the rise of information-oriented warfare, there has been an increased awareness about the importance of displays that can take a pounding. Truly tough displays are needed for military command center, in-vehicle, and stand-alone applications. There is also interest in using AMREL MOJAVE fully rugged displays in the industrial settings such as Oil & Gas, mining, and logistics.

AMREL MOJAVE fully rugged displays have been independently certified for the demanding MIL-STDs 810 and 461. They have been built to operate in extreme conditions, such as:

  • Shock
  • Severe temperatures
  • Strong, repetitive vibrations
  • Water
  • Sand
  • Everything else a hostile environmental can throw at them

“While Mojave fully rugged displays are new to the American market, they have been successfully used by European and other defense forces for some time,” stated Mr. Chen. “Anyone who buys an AMREL MOJAVE fully rugged display can be confident that not only was it built with 30 years of experience of supplying military-tough platforms, but also its durability has been proven in extremely challenging conditions.”

For more information, visit computers.amrel.com/displays

[layerslider id=”31″]

Unmanned Systems Markets: Present & Future [TABLE]

Since I work for a company that sells to unmanned system developers, I am always on the lookout for information about market trends. Toward this end, I scanned a number of promotions for marketing reports, selected out bits of information, and summarized them in the table below.

Unmanned Systems Markets: Size and GrowthMarket table #1Sources include Markets and Markets (UGV & UGV, UUV, UAV), Report Buyer (UGV), Big Market Research (UAV), Reports n Reports (UUV), and Report Linker (UUV)

The two different CAGRs for UAV reflect opinions of two separate reports

 UUV

Many marketing reports are often extremely optimistic, so projections of enormous growth are not unusual.  Still, Holey Moley, look at the predictions for Unmanned Underwater Vehicles (UUVs)!  Ten-fold growth in six years!

Like other unmanned systems, Defense applications will play a big role in UUVs expansion and development. However, utilization of UUVs for Oil & Gas inspection and construction are also significant.

I wonder if these incredible projections were made before the drop in oil prices.  Hard-to-reach oil beneath the sea may be too expensive to develop if petroleum prices remain depressed. That could affect the demand for UUVs.

UUVs can be divided into Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROV) and Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUV). In fact, some reports consider them separate markets. See table below.

Market table #2

While the ROV market is currently the largest, AUV is expected to eventually dominate as autonomous capabilities improve. Other technological drivers include increased number of payloads, endurance, miniaturization, and AIP (Air Independent Propulsion).

UGV

While the UUV market growth is the most impressive, the Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGV) CAGR is nothing to sneeze at either. Certainly, we can expect demand for UGVs to be fueled by Improvised Explosive Device (IED) detection and Intelligence, Surveillance & Reconnaissance (ISR), i.e. their traditional duties.  However, according to some reports, we can expect UGVs to be also used for civilian applications, such as material handling, transportation, social welfare (especially elder care), agriculture, and telepresence (especially medicine).

[layerslider id=”31″]

UAV

The biggest surprise for the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) market was the demand for combat applications.  One report predicted that Unmanned Combat Aerial Vehicles (UCAV) would constitute the single largest segment with a share of 34%.

A grain of salt as big as Gibraltar

Overall, the reports that I surveyed were upbeat, predicting exponential growth for all unmanned vehicles. North America (and Europe to a lesser degree) is expected to remain the dominant market. However, I saw multiple predictions that most growth will happen in “emerging” markets, such as BRIC countries, and other parts of the developing world.

Obviously, unplanned events could seriously affect predictions. If a UAV collided with a manned airplane and killed someone famous, the FCC’s pace in approving UAVs for domestic airspace could remain glacial.  On the other hand, if a small, developed country successfully integrated UAVs into their air control system, the pressure on the FCC to speed up the approval process could increase.

As always, view these marketing reports with a scrupulous, but wary eye.

 

What is the economic impact of UAV integration?

Back in 2013, AUVSI raised some eyebrows with its bold predictions that when UAVs are integrated into the American airspace, the “… first three years of integration more than 70,000 jobs will be created in the United States with an economic impact of more than $13.6 billion. This benefit will grow through 2025 when we foresee more than 100,000 jobs created and economic impact of $82 billion.”

Some folks have taken issue with the report’s rosy predictions. As far as I can tell, their major objections are that one) all the guesswork in the report is a bunch of guesswork, and two) the report uses UAV integration in Japan to estimate economic impact in the US, which is a bad idea, because Japan is, you know, a different country.

[layerslider id=”31″]

I think of economic projections as belonging in the same category as old fashion analog compasses. They will point you vaguely in the correct direction (if you’re lucky and there’s no nearby magnetic interference), but it’s best not to regard them as being too precise. I hope anyone reading them has the same appreciation of their inherent limitations, so I think the criticism, while accurate, may be a little misplaced.

You can decide for yourself. Follow the links below for both the report and its critics.

AUVSI’s The Economic Impact of Unmanned Aircraft Systems Integration in the United States
Five Reasons the AUVSI Got Its Drone Market Forecast Wrong

Autonomous truck  [VIDEO]

Ever have to explain LIDAR to a layman? Internal mapping? Autonomy?  In a brief period of time, this BBC video does  an admirable job of explaining in jargon-free terms some of the issues surrounding autonomous vehicles. This short video shot an autonomous 10-ton, 6-wheeled truck running through its paces, as an BBC announcer described the significance of its actions.

[layerslider id=”31″]

APEX AH53, the New Muscular Android Handheld

AMREL announced the launch of APEX AH53, a rugged Android Handheld with a 5.3” display.ah53

“The APEX AH53 is the result of listening to our customers,” explained Kalvin Chen, AMREL’s VP of Operations. “They said they wanted four things in a handheld. First, they needed an Android operating system. Second, they wanted a big 5.3-inch display. Then, they wanted a powerful processor. Finally, we’re AMREL, so, of course, they wanted it rugged.”

The APEX AH53 Handheld features Android 4.2.2 (Jelly Bean) OS. It also has a powerful Quad-core Cortex™ A7 1.2GHz, perfect for data-heavy applications

The APEX AH53 handheld lives up to the rugged tradition established by AMREL over the last 30 years. Throw it into water, cover it in dust, this IP 67-rated APEX AH53 still works. It has been built to survive 4+ feet drops and to successfully operate at high/cold temperatures.

“Our clients have expressed interest in using APEX AH53 Handheld for applications in logistics, warehouses, and data collection,” reports Mr. Chen.

Even though the APEX AH53 is tough as nails, it feels like a lightweight, commercial handheld. Approximately an inch thick, it weighs less than 14 ounces.

In addition to cellular capabilities, the APEX AH53 Handheld features include Bluetooth® 4.0 LE, NFC, camera, WLAN, and optional barcode reader.

For more information, visit: computers.amrel.com/apex