This could be useful for physical media formats. Although even that has the same problem that streaming and broadcast has. Once you get into really large screen sizes, the size of the data becomes a difficult problem.
> Yeah, you should actually try it in real life. It absolutely is visible.
I have. You're full of sh*t. Even the math doesn't support your side of the argument. There are very nice diagrams on the web that demonstrate the other guy's point.
If the TV is not the centerpiece of your home, chances are that you aren't going to see the benefits of HD. Forget about 4K.
People also tend to completely ignore the sound aspect of this.
Just because it's being force fed to you, it doesn't mean you are actually using it.
I own a Smart TV but I have a Roku attached to it. If my next TV also has "smart tv" features, they will be completely transparent to me. It's like a PC that has a force bundled copy of Windows on it.
If Valve can help resolve whatever problems you think still require documentation, then that will yield a positive result for distributions that aren't SteamOS.
If there isn't any need to consult the M, then there won't be any motivation to tell people to RTFM.
Although if Microsoft was dependent on people installing Windows on their own they would have been dead a long time ago.
Don't some of these devices offer personal "cloud services". They may need to be subject to a certain level of vulnerability in order to be fully functional.
Nonsense. Adding an ethernet port to a printer has always been about plugging it into something with an ethernet port. This has been a simple matter to deal with for decades now (YES, DECADES). So why anyone insists on making this seem complicated is quite a mystery.
Not that much really. That's what you can have on a thumb drive or on your phone. If your device is not the "fastest and bestest and most expensive", it won't really be that great of a tragedy really.
You're simply not talking about enough stuff for it to really matter.
Unless you're sitting there waiting for the copy to finish and then rushing off with it, the theoretical advantage of firewire (or even eSATA) is dubious.
That doesn't concern me as an end user. You might as well drone on about how much profit that Apple earns on every device it sells. It's simply not relevant to those of us interested in employing a particular technology for some purpose.
Try an argument that's not irrelevant to the actual consumer.
Ubiquity. Even with a USB3 device, I can be certain that pretty much any modern computer can read that drive. Even Macs that want to actively avoid USB3 in favor of ThunderBolt can read that drive.
If I use eSATA I will be locking myself out of a lot of PCs and ALL Macs. If I use FireWire, I will still be locking myself out of a lot of PCs.
If I want FAST, I am better off using SATA directly with some sort of hot swap chassis.
> They don't have anything in the cheap $400 range because they don't make cheap.
Sure they do. They just charge more for it.
The fact that PC alternatives are less aesthetically appealing is really not a feature. It's something that most people don't really care about. It's certainly not something they are willing to PAY for.
The vast bulk of the market has already turned it's back on this notion of "design". Once you take that away, Apple is nothing special at all.
A 5 year old craptacular Dell can run circles around a current Mac because it's maintainable and east to tweak without spending a lot of money.
> Apple aren't the only ones pushing Thunderbolt as it's an Intel product. Look at any motherboard manufacturer and you'll probably find an expensive motherboard that comes equipped with Thunderbolt.
"find an expensive motherboard" versus "find any cheap motherboard".
Yes. Apple are the only ones "pushing" Thunderbolt.
Ultimately, it's about income redistribution. Those of us that can afford insurance are going to be subsidizing those that cannot.
Beyond that, the ACA regulates what products you can buy. It seeks to deny you options that allow you to better manage overall costs. It also regulates what and whom can be covered in a manner likely to increase premiums.
The do-gooders despise the idea that some of us might be self-reliant and seek to undermine that. They also despise the idea that we may choose to spend more for a better option.
> That information is already available, to some degree, to Medicare and private insurers.
In other words, it's really not.
Someone claimed that the US spends 3x more on medical care. That number could easily be accounted for due to bogus inflated hospital billing rates. The stated price and what gets paid vary wildly. These rates are treated like trade secrets and are greatly discounted if you are a large corporation.
If you are just Joe Schmo, you could get raked over the coals.
That's a good question considering the fact that I've never seen Firefox take up the entire CPU on any desktop platform. Quite often Windows will seem obviously bogged down and there aren't any performance metrics to account for it. Can't even point a finger at the competing web browser.
> Why do Windows 8 tablets running on an Intel i5 x86 CPU
Actually, the newer Intel CPUs are supposed to suck a lot less when it comes to power consumption. Atoms just suck in general. The fact that they don't draw any power is hardly anything to write home about.
Except the Obamacare website is already a topic of discussion here because it is tech and it's a big fat disaster. The fact that the feds decided to make this company their gatekeeper did not go unnoticed by some of us. The fact that they are embedded in such a high profile government website is not something to be casually swept under the rug with weak attempts at politically motivated insults.
Anywhere that's supported. There are already cloud services for which this is a problem. Some platforms and devices aren't supported. This even includes combinations that are by no means obscure alternatives.
HBO just doesn't have that much going for it these days. That's why I've never bothered to subscribe to it in recent decades (even when I had cable). They had a much more diverse lineup of material back in the day. The fact that they make original content now is not a good tradeoff. The overall effect is an inferior product.
You can't really take these costs at face value. If you are talking about hospital care, then you're dealing with billing rates that are a work of fiction. Those are prices that you will never pay as an insured person. Those rates are reduced both by the federal governments and the large corporations that sell insurance.
If the multiplier is only 2.5, then there's a very good chance that the actual US expenditures are LOWER than what the NHS is paying.
Plus the NHS is more comparable to Medicaid anyways and they pay so poorly that US doctors actively try to avoid such patients.
If you have a lawyer, you might be able to do some negotiating. However, you are usually stuck paying whatever the hospital wants because you really have no time to negotiate in an emergency.
Afterwards, the hospital again has no reason to negotiate with you. They can just send your account to collections and later sue you and no one will have any sympathy for you. Some judge will just tell you to "suck it up".
The fact that the MSRP is a fiction won't matter. You are "the small guy" with no bargaining power. Other large corporations have some bargaining power. You do not.
Slashdot Mirror
This could be useful for physical media formats. Although even that has the same problem that streaming and broadcast has. Once you get into really large screen sizes, the size of the data becomes a difficult problem.
4K could be an interesting home theater format.
> Yeah, you should actually try it in real life. It absolutely is visible.
I have. You're full of sh*t. Even the math doesn't support your side of the argument. There are very nice diagrams on the web that demonstrate the other guy's point.
If the TV is not the centerpiece of your home, chances are that you aren't going to see the benefits of HD. Forget about 4K.
People also tend to completely ignore the sound aspect of this.
Just because it's being force fed to you, it doesn't mean you are actually using it.
I own a Smart TV but I have a Roku attached to it. If my next TV also has "smart tv" features, they will be completely transparent to me. It's like a PC that has a force bundled copy of Windows on it.
Will never see it. Will never use it.
The real question here is "where's the content?".
If Valve can help resolve whatever problems you think still require documentation, then that will yield a positive result for distributions that aren't SteamOS.
If there isn't any need to consult the M, then there won't be any motivation to tell people to RTFM.
Although if Microsoft was dependent on people installing Windows on their own they would have been dead a long time ago.
Don't some of these devices offer personal "cloud services". They may need to be subject to a certain level of vulnerability in order to be fully functional.
Nonsense. Adding an ethernet port to a printer has always been about plugging it into something with an ethernet port. This has been a simple matter to deal with for decades now (YES, DECADES). So why anyone insists on making this seem complicated is quite a mystery.
> moving GBs of data all the time
Not that much really. That's what you can have on a thumb drive or on your phone. If your device is not the "fastest and bestest and most expensive", it won't really be that great of a tragedy really.
You're simply not talking about enough stuff for it to really matter.
Unless you're sitting there waiting for the copy to finish and then rushing off with it, the theoretical advantage of firewire (or even eSATA) is dubious.
> Try reading the spec.
That doesn't concern me as an end user. You might as well drone on about how much profit that Apple earns on every device it sells. It's simply not relevant to those of us interested in employing a particular technology for some purpose.
Try an argument that's not irrelevant to the actual consumer.
Ubiquity. Even with a USB3 device, I can be certain that pretty much any modern computer can read that drive. Even Macs that want to actively avoid USB3 in favor of ThunderBolt can read that drive.
If I use eSATA I will be locking myself out of a lot of PCs and ALL Macs. If I use FireWire, I will still be locking myself out of a lot of PCs.
If I want FAST, I am better off using SATA directly with some sort of hot swap chassis.
> Too bad your kids are embarrassed to let their friends know their dad's a skinflint.
Actually, $600 pays for a very respectable desktop if you aren't stuck on overpriced consumer labels.
The Ubuntu install probably didn't save any money because the hardware likely already came with Microsoft bundleware anyways.
Been there. Did that. Quickly got over it...
Don't buy into the propaganda anymore.
> They don't have anything in the cheap $400 range because they don't make cheap.
Sure they do. They just charge more for it.
The fact that PC alternatives are less aesthetically appealing is really not a feature. It's something that most people don't really care about. It's certainly not something they are willing to PAY for.
The vast bulk of the market has already turned it's back on this notion of "design". Once you take that away, Apple is nothing special at all.
A 5 year old craptacular Dell can run circles around a current Mac because it's maintainable and east to tweak without spending a lot of money.
You've never been anywhere near Texas. You're just repeating tired old stereotypes.
> Apple aren't the only ones pushing Thunderbolt as it's an Intel product. Look at any motherboard manufacturer and you'll probably find an expensive motherboard that comes equipped with Thunderbolt.
"find an expensive motherboard" versus "find any cheap motherboard".
Yes. Apple are the only ones "pushing" Thunderbolt.
I don't see what's so horrible about it beyond the fact that it doesn't conform to your particular brand fetish of being associated with Apple.
It's cheap, ubiquitous, convenient, and good enough for all but the corner cases.
> in what way is the ACA designed to do so?
Ultimately, it's about income redistribution. Those of us that can afford insurance are going to be subsidizing those that cannot.
Beyond that, the ACA regulates what products you can buy. It seeks to deny you options that allow you to better manage overall costs. It also regulates what and whom can be covered in a manner likely to increase premiums.
The do-gooders despise the idea that some of us might be self-reliant and seek to undermine that. They also despise the idea that we may choose to spend more for a better option.
> That information is already available, to some degree, to Medicare and private insurers.
In other words, it's really not.
Someone claimed that the US spends 3x more on medical care. That number could easily be accounted for due to bogus inflated hospital billing rates. The stated price and what gets paid vary wildly. These rates are treated like trade secrets and are greatly discounted if you are a large corporation.
If you are just Joe Schmo, you could get raked over the coals.
That's a good question considering the fact that I've never seen Firefox take up the entire CPU on any desktop platform. Quite often Windows will seem obviously bogged down and there aren't any performance metrics to account for it. Can't even point a finger at the competing web browser.
> Why do Windows 8 tablets running on an Intel i5 x86 CPU
Actually, the newer Intel CPUs are supposed to suck a lot less when it comes to power consumption. Atoms just suck in general. The fact that they don't draw any power is hardly anything to write home about.
The fact that you can do two things at once doesn't mean that you have to do lost of pointless work all the time.
Except the Obamacare website is already a topic of discussion here because it is tech and it's a big fat disaster. The fact that the feds decided to make this company their gatekeeper did not go unnoticed by some of us. The fact that they are embedded in such a high profile government website is not something to be casually swept under the rug with weak attempts at politically motivated insults.
> Easy. I can view my docs anywhere.
Anywhere that's supported. There are already cloud services for which this is a problem. Some platforms and devices aren't supported. This even includes combinations that are by no means obscure alternatives.
HBO just doesn't have that much going for it these days. That's why I've never bothered to subscribe to it in recent decades (even when I had cable). They had a much more diverse lineup of material back in the day. The fact that they make original content now is not a good tradeoff. The overall effect is an inferior product.
Thanks for playing anyways...
You can't really take these costs at face value. If you are talking about hospital care, then you're dealing with billing rates that are a work of fiction. Those are prices that you will never pay as an insured person. Those rates are reduced both by the federal governments and the large corporations that sell insurance.
If the multiplier is only 2.5, then there's a very good chance that the actual US expenditures are LOWER than what the NHS is paying.
Plus the NHS is more comparable to Medicaid anyways and they pay so poorly that US doctors actively try to avoid such patients.
> Wow, what insight.
If you have a lawyer, you might be able to do some negotiating. However, you are usually stuck paying whatever the hospital wants because you really have no time to negotiate in an emergency.
Afterwards, the hospital again has no reason to negotiate with you. They can just send your account to collections and later sue you and no one will have any sympathy for you. Some judge will just tell you to "suck it up".
The fact that the MSRP is a fiction won't matter. You are "the small guy" with no bargaining power. Other large corporations have some bargaining power. You do not.