"Market reports" are probably cooked to make Apple look better by ignoring all of those 7 inch tablets that no one labels as such. Those are commonplace anymore.
Samsung is the big thing in phones now and that may very well generate a halo effect for their tablets if the price tag cut in half isn't doing that already.
Why would you assume that Apple is necessarily going to steal Amazon customers? They are the prime movers in the eBook market. Despite what certain people want you to think, not everyone in this space is just shamelessly copying Apple.
If anything, Apple needs to release a 7 inch tablet to avoid hemoragging users. Small tablets are cheap and have the potential to undercut Apple's percieved dominance.
The only thing valid in your screed is Quickbooks and that's because it's considered an industry standard for accounts. Your account is likely to require Quickbooks. That requirement is really out of your hands.
The problem here is the Wayland Mentality. These are people that seem to be completley out of touch with any sort of serious computing or anything beyond Macs. This must be the case because remote mangement and graphic terminals are very common in Windows shops.
How can you be employed in technology and not have encountered use cases for graphics terminals and remote management?
Now the clueless do-gooder Wayland Mentality will also likely dictate (for the sake of usability) that there only be pretty GUI interfaces for managing things. So you will suddenly find yourself dealing with a remote system and only having one option of dealing with it: a GUI.
Thanks to The Wayland Menality, this will be painful and unpleasant because this "obscure" use case was ignored during design of the new standard.
A better X would be cool. However Wayland is not that.
> You live with something like VNC. The people who use those types of software have decided remote management isn't a feature they care about enough to sacrifice performance.
That basically leaves you with a small minority of the market and kind of blows away the whole "but no one cares about it" argument.
People care enough about it that this part of Windows got "fixed".
Now "helpful" types want to rip it out of Linux just as serious Windows users have gotten used to having this feature.
That kind of blows away and externally focused argument for "fixing graphics in Linux".
Here is a perfect demonstration of the "clueless retard" mentality in this discussion. Running X on top of Wayland doesn't help you. It's like running X on Windows or running X on MacOS. It only allows you to run those apps still coded to use X.
Running X on Wayland doesn't allow me to run Wayland apps remotely.
It's just like how running X on a Mac doesn't allow me to run iTunes on one of my Linux boxes.
If you are actually be a an Apple wannabe, then actually use their products. They aren't all they're cracked up to be.
RDP on Windows works well because the remote desktop use case is part of the underlying system design. It's no longer something that was just ignored and bolted on later.
Every time I see someone try to say that remote desktop usage is not commonplace I wonder if they are still in middle school and still live in their mother's basement. Clearly they haven't been inside of a corporate computing environment lately.
Nope. While a small minority of loud retards were repeating other people's outdated arguments, most of the rest of the world recreated the network transparency of X. Now you have a corporate environment where doing Unix-y things from 20 years ago is commonplace.
As much as I despise Windows, it does do the remote desktop thing well enough to be useful. I can't say the same for Macs.
The rest of the world has finally caught up with X. It's the people that want to dump X that are really living in the past.
It turns out that in a highly networked world, network transparency is actually a very handy thing. Dumping it just because you're an Apple wannabe is just stupid.
Security is not mostly the same. You didn't have limits on liquids before 911. You didn't have to unpack half of your luggage before 911. You didn't have to take off shoes and belts before 911.
If you flew during 2001, you would have seen an obvious visible increase in the amount of security screening wait times that still haven't really completely gone away.
We've reached the point where you need to consent to being irradiated or molested in order to get onto an airplane. If you don't think we already live in a dystopian novel you simply have no clue.
Quietly putting up with unecessary nonsense does make you a sheep. Although I suspect you don't have any actual experience regarding the subject at hand.
It's easy to be dismissive when you aren't an aggrieved party.
As someone that actually stands to lose from Obama's tax policy, I understand the need to do my fair share in tough times. I also freely acknowledge that giving young families and recently graduated students more money will more likely cause money to move around the economy.
> That it would. I have an SSD in a USB3 enclosure, and it can happily consume 80Mbyte/sec read over my little network. It might even be able to do better than that: I've not measured a bulk write read from the internal SSD yet.
Unless you've got a slow SSD drive, it should have more performance potential than just 80MB/s.
I have gotten 100MB/s transferring between two SATA spinny drives across my gigabit network.
Now this is a lot of data we're talking about. Creating the backup and restoring the backup both will be performance sensitive. Every little bit you can do to help push things along will be very worthwhile in the end. It probably makes sense to be as close to the bare metal as you can be.
You might even want to buy more expensive drives to get better performance. Perhaps a better RAID card too.
The problem with small drives is the fact that every drive needs it's own port or needs to share part of a common bus. Old drives also tend to be slow drives. So you end up with something that is closer to dying, slower, and more complicated.
Sometimes it's just time to chuck the old stuff.
If a drive is going to keep your solution from being able to saturate a gigabit network connection then it needs to go.
If not, then RAID is a reasonable part of a backup strategy. It also turns an O(n) problem into an O(c) problem as you don't have to worry about n+1 little disks and how nothing is a clean 1:1 mapping from one drive to another.
This guy is basically trying to replicate the classic 80s PC backup where you would have a stack of floppy disks except the size of the media is bigger.
You can get an 8 bay SATA JBOD enclosure for about $300 and that will include an extra SATA card. It won't be a proper RAID setup but it will allow you to mount 8 drives at once and it won't cost more than your car.
Slashdot Mirror
So was the Archos 9 but nobody seemed to know about it or want it.
Nope. He's just a mindless fanboy.
"Market reports" are probably cooked to make Apple look better by ignoring all of those 7 inch tablets that no one labels as such. Those are commonplace anymore.
Samsung is the big thing in phones now and that may very well generate a halo effect for their tablets if the price tag cut in half isn't doing that already.
Market Reports can really only tell you old news.
Why would you assume that Apple is necessarily going to steal Amazon customers? They are the prime movers in the eBook market. Despite what certain people want you to think, not everyone in this space is just shamelessly copying Apple.
If anything, Apple needs to release a 7 inch tablet to avoid hemoragging users. Small tablets are cheap and have the potential to undercut Apple's percieved dominance.
You've got things backwards. It's the MSPL is engineered to be a poison pill. The GPL is much older and much more well established.
It's anything newer that's going out of it's way to be hostile to the GPL or copyleft generally.
The only thing valid in your screed is Quickbooks and that's because it's considered an industry standard for accounts. Your account is likely to require Quickbooks. That requirement is really out of your hands.
The rest is just stupid FUD cliches.
Acrobat just for exporting to PDF? Really...
The problem here is the Wayland Mentality. These are people that seem to be completley out of touch with any sort of serious computing or anything beyond Macs. This must be the case because remote mangement and graphic terminals are very common in Windows shops.
How can you be employed in technology and not have encountered use cases for graphics terminals and remote management?
Now the clueless do-gooder Wayland Mentality will also likely dictate (for the sake of usability) that there only be pretty GUI interfaces for managing things. So you will suddenly find yourself dealing with a remote system and only having one option of dealing with it: a GUI.
Thanks to The Wayland Menality, this will be painful and unpleasant because this "obscure" use case was ignored during design of the new standard.
A better X would be cool. However Wayland is not that.
> You live with something like VNC. The people who use those types of software have decided remote management isn't a feature they care about enough to sacrifice performance.
That basically leaves you with a small minority of the market and kind of blows away the whole "but no one cares about it" argument.
People care enough about it that this part of Windows got "fixed".
Now "helpful" types want to rip it out of Linux just as serious Windows users have gotten used to having this feature.
That kind of blows away and externally focused argument for "fixing graphics in Linux".
Vastly many huh?
Too bad you can't think of any obvious examples right now.
Promises are worthless and you are a moron for trusting them.
Either Wayland is accounting for network transparency NOW or it's never going to happen. At best it will be an unusable mess like you see on Macs.
Here is a perfect demonstration of the "clueless retard" mentality in this discussion. Running X on top of Wayland doesn't help you. It's like running X on Windows or running X on MacOS. It only allows you to run those apps still coded to use X.
Running X on Wayland doesn't allow me to run Wayland apps remotely.
It's just like how running X on a Mac doesn't allow me to run iTunes on one of my Linux boxes.
VNC sucks. It's slow and unusable.
Actually try to use Macs sometime.
If you are actually be a an Apple wannabe, then actually use their products. They aren't all they're cracked up to be.
RDP on Windows works well because the remote desktop use case is part of the underlying system design. It's no longer something that was just ignored and bolted on later.
Every time I see someone try to say that remote desktop usage is not commonplace I wonder if they are still in middle school and still live in their mother's basement. Clearly they haven't been inside of a corporate computing environment lately.
Nope. While a small minority of loud retards were repeating other people's outdated arguments, most of the rest of the world recreated the network transparency of X. Now you have a corporate environment where doing Unix-y things from 20 years ago is commonplace.
As much as I despise Windows, it does do the remote desktop thing well enough to be useful. I can't say the same for Macs.
The rest of the world has finally caught up with X. It's the people that want to dump X that are really living in the past.
It turns out that in a highly networked world, network transparency is actually a very handy thing. Dumping it just because you're an Apple wannabe is just stupid.
Good luck sorting through all of that latter.
SD cards aren't even big enough to label.
The spice must flow!
That's a pittance when compared to expensive military hardware even when you are talking one single instance of a particular bit of equipment.
It's much like whining about the budget for NASA or NPR.
Security is not mostly the same. You didn't have limits on liquids before 911. You didn't have to unpack half of your luggage before 911. You didn't have to take off shoes and belts before 911.
If you flew during 2001, you would have seen an obvious visible increase in the amount of security screening wait times that still haven't really completely gone away.
We've reached the point where you need to consent to being irradiated or molested in order to get onto an airplane. If you don't think we already live in a dystopian novel you simply have no clue.
Quietly putting up with unecessary nonsense does make you a sheep. Although I suspect you don't have any actual experience regarding the subject at hand.
It's easy to be dismissive when you aren't an aggrieved party.
54% of Americans don't fly.
That's how I read it.
As someone that actually stands to lose from Obama's tax policy, I understand the need to do my fair share in tough times. I also freely acknowledge that giving young families and recently graduated students more money will more likely cause money to move around the economy.
Not everyone with money is a narcissist jackass.
> And "Tax the rich!" plays to parasitic idiots dependent on government handouts.
You're only a parasite if you're an individual. If you are a corporation then tax breaks and corporate welfare are all perfectly acceptable.
That's the Republican Way.
> That it would. I have an SSD in a USB3 enclosure, and it can happily consume 80Mbyte/sec read over my little network. It might even be able to do better than that: I've not measured a bulk write read from the internal SSD yet.
Unless you've got a slow SSD drive, it should have more performance potential than just 80MB/s.
I have gotten 100MB/s transferring between two SATA spinny drives across my gigabit network.
Now this is a lot of data we're talking about. Creating the backup and restoring the backup both will be performance sensitive. Every little bit you can do to help push things along will be very worthwhile in the end. It probably makes sense to be as close to the bare metal as you can be.
You might even want to buy more expensive drives to get better performance. Perhaps a better RAID card too.
The problem with small drives is the fact that every drive needs it's own port or needs to share part of a common bus. Old drives also tend to be slow drives. So you end up with something that is closer to dying, slower, and more complicated.
Sometimes it's just time to chuck the old stuff.
If a drive is going to keep your solution from being able to saturate a gigabit network connection then it needs to go.
Do you want your media to fail?
Do you want a medial failure to be intolerable?
If not, then RAID is a reasonable part of a backup strategy. It also turns an O(n) problem into an O(c) problem as you don't have to worry about n+1 little disks and how nothing is a clean 1:1 mapping from one drive to another.
This guy is basically trying to replicate the classic 80s PC backup where you would have a stack of floppy disks except the size of the media is bigger.
10TB is certainly in hobby territory. Putting 24TB in that same territory is not really that much of a stretch.
Times change. Tech improves. Before you know it that $100K SSD you had to borrow from a client has been replicated by cheap consumer grade stuff.
You can get an 8 bay SATA JBOD enclosure for about $300 and that will include an extra SATA card. It won't be a proper RAID setup but it will allow you to mount 8 drives at once and it won't cost more than your car.