Pretty much. Also, given the general purpose nature of GPUs now for running "other" code, it's only a matter of time before someone writes malware that lives in your GPU firmware.
Doesn't even have to be profit driven. If the government (or anyone with sufficient $ / technical skill) either owns or co-erces the CAs in the current model, you're boned.
To illustrate the advantage this gives Apple. Apple don't hide it - they aim for 35-45% margins on their gear. Turn that around, it means they could drop prices by 25-30% and still be making the same margin that most of the PC OEMs are making. The PC OEMs can't drop much further to compete.
It cuts costs in various ways. As you say, it cuts the cost of your supply chain. And it does add up. You go from 1 colour to 2, and you have doubled your inventory tracking costs. If you're going to different chassis builds (as per samsung and the rest), then you're massively increasing costs to re-tool the factory, keep track of a whole inventory of other components for the manufacturing, etc.
It most definitely adds up, and this is why apple can do stuff like maintain 45% margins on the macbook air whilst keeping the build quality of the enclosure, fund OS X development, NOT include shitware, provide iCloud and all the other support, while the PC guys can barely clone it somewhat without providing any of the additional service/software stuff - on margins so thin that most of them are posting losses or otherwise not doing well.
HP/Dell are completely insane with the configuration options you can do on their notebooks. For example, I can select whether or not to include a $5 option analog modem on our corp issued laptops. I can select multiple different WIFI cards, I can select a heap of different screens, etc. The number of different combinations that were possible with our Elitebook 8570s for example was simply huge.
Now because HP offer so many different options on that same model that really don't matter - they can't stamp out a few million of them in case people want something tweaked. They can't order bulk on CPUs in case people don't order that CPU. Etc.
Apple? Here are 3 different sizes, each has 2 different CPU/RAM options. We offer a custom build ultra high end option for bumping the CPU/RAM.
95% of sales they can fill with machines they can just stamp out en-mass.
And I'm saying that unless you have personally audited the source code, and the machine code for the compiler, you are trusting someone else, and that it does what it says it does. Which is not any different to running closed source software. I still have a compiler and development environment on my mac if i want to write my own software.
... seems about on par with 7 to me maybe with a little better battery life on my 4s. I did a back up and install through itunes, not over the air (didn't have enough free space). I have had issues with previous iOS before (Betas mostly) that were solved by backing up, setting up as a new phone with the new OS and then restoring data from backup.
The fact that Samsung has a "galaxy line" among a heap of other android handsets is telling. If they were to get rid of most of the lineup of garbage that few people want, they'd be able to sell more of the higher end models at a lower price due to cheaper cost of manufacturing. Henry Ford worked this stuff out with the Model T.
I get evaluation phones on a regular basis at work. I've had perhaps 3 crashes on various iphones since 2008. I've used the Galaxy S4, The HTC One as examples of recent alternatives. Didn't like either of them. The shipping firmware on the HTC had bugs I stumbled across within a week, the S4 feels unpleasant to hold. And I do not like the android UI. If you do, great. I have zero interest in spending time to "learn how to use" my phone. It is an appliance.
Much better to use XML and thus have the files readable with any XML parser, than design yet another configuration file format that needs yet another configuration file parser to be written.
You get logs on the Mac and plenty of diagnostic tools including dtrace. If the phone is broken you take it back to apple and they give you a new one, but there are diagnostic logs on that too that you can get off it.
Sounds like you're a typical nerd who gets asked to support apple gear and you're out of your depth, so just say "it's crap" because you don't understand it.
Whilst the iphone is pretty, what apple actually sells is a device you don't have to babysit, that does what it says on the box in a manner that is both attractive and pleasant to use.
The reason many people, myself included by apple gear is because I have spent the past 20 years babysitting computer shit because it half does what it says, needs care to use to ensure it doesn't get malware, etc. I'm fucking over it. I don't care about the theoretical reduced flexibility if the device does what I actually want it to do, and doesn't need babysitting.
Being pretty is a bonus, not the primary motivator.
... there's a reason apple don't make 35 different models of smartphone, 18 different laptop models, and 5 different lines of desktop (like other OEMs seem determined to do).
Because stamping out 100 million copies of a single model (e.g., iphone) is a LOT more cost effective than trying to tool up to stamp out 10 million copies each of 10 different models. Which means that they can increase their profit margin or increase feature set at the same price as they see fit.
I ran a home ZFS box with 2 GB in it (1.5 TB of mirrored storage) for 6 months with zero issues using FreeNAS. It's now got 10 GB, for home media streaming use i have noticed basically zero difference. Saturated gig-e with both setups.
Bullshit. You can add different size VDEVs to a pool, it works fine. It auto balances load across them, and no partitioning is required. My current home setup is 2x1 TB and 2x 512 GB mirrors (soon to be replaced with bigger drives, when it is full).
Just accept that you need to add (or replace) disks 2 at a time (mirror VDEVs), and move on. Unless you're dealing with > 20-30 drives, I'd suggest that RAIDZn is a poor choice. Also, the way writes work, making massive raid groups with large numbers of drives in them (i.e., adding another drive to a RAID5, like you would with BTRFS) is a bad idea. Parity RAID In general is a bad idea. Capacity is cheap, performance is not. Parity raid sucks for performance.
Yup. Most people's expansion difficulties are due to retarded pool configurations. If you accept that 1. disk is cheap and 2. mirrors, whilst expensive in terms of disk capacity are way better performance and more flexible, zfs rocks.
People seem to have it stuck in their head that bigger RAID numbers are better, but RAIDZ/RAIDZ2/RAIDZ3 are only really useful when you're dealing with HUGE numbers of disks and performance is not so important. Normally you're far better off creating a larger number of VDEV mirrors, both in terms of performance and in terms of flexibility.
Which brings up another point - those not used to dealing with enterprise storage may not realize that you can/should/maybe want an array with more than one RAID group in it. They end up putting all their disks in one big VDEV which sucks for performance and flexibility, then blame ZFS for not being flexible.
Read how it works, don't make retarded choices based on ignorance, and you'll be fine.
Think about why you want to do that. Normally, it's due to fuck up from not setting your pool up in a sensible manner in the first place. Don't do that.
1 GB of RAM is worth about $20 these days anyhow (less?).
And yes, de-dup is expensive. Most of the time in my experience you get far better benefits from compression anyhow (source: real world enterprise datasets at work).
Slashdot Mirror
Pretty much. Also, given the general purpose nature of GPUs now for running "other" code, it's only a matter of time before someone writes malware that lives in your GPU firmware.
Doesn't even have to be profit driven. If the government (or anyone with sufficient $ / technical skill) either owns or co-erces the CAs in the current model, you're boned.
To illustrate the advantage this gives Apple. Apple don't hide it - they aim for 35-45% margins on their gear. Turn that around, it means they could drop prices by 25-30% and still be making the same margin that most of the PC OEMs are making. The PC OEMs can't drop much further to compete.
It cuts costs in various ways. As you say, it cuts the cost of your supply chain. And it does add up. You go from 1 colour to 2, and you have doubled your inventory tracking costs. If you're going to different chassis builds (as per samsung and the rest), then you're massively increasing costs to re-tool the factory, keep track of a whole inventory of other components for the manufacturing, etc.
It most definitely adds up, and this is why apple can do stuff like maintain 45% margins on the macbook air whilst keeping the build quality of the enclosure, fund OS X development, NOT include shitware, provide iCloud and all the other support, while the PC guys can barely clone it somewhat without providing any of the additional service/software stuff - on margins so thin that most of them are posting losses or otherwise not doing well.
HP/Dell are completely insane with the configuration options you can do on their notebooks. For example, I can select whether or not to include a $5 option analog modem on our corp issued laptops. I can select multiple different WIFI cards, I can select a heap of different screens, etc. The number of different combinations that were possible with our Elitebook 8570s for example was simply huge.
Now because HP offer so many different options on that same model that really don't matter - they can't stamp out a few million of them in case people want something tweaked. They can't order bulk on CPUs in case people don't order that CPU. Etc.
Apple? Here are 3 different sizes, each has 2 different CPU/RAM options. We offer a custom build ultra high end option for bumping the CPU/RAM.
95% of sales they can fill with machines they can just stamp out en-mass.
And I'm saying that unless you have personally audited the source code, and the machine code for the compiler, you are trusting someone else, and that it does what it says it does. Which is not any different to running closed source software. I still have a compiler and development environment on my mac if i want to write my own software.
/. story submission approval has a clear anti-apple bias, this is just yet another example of it. click-bait for ad impressions, that's all.
... seems about on par with 7 to me maybe with a little better battery life on my 4s. I did a back up and install through itunes, not over the air (didn't have enough free space). I have had issues with previous iOS before (Betas mostly) that were solved by backing up, setting up as a new phone with the new OS and then restoring data from backup.
The fact that Samsung has a "galaxy line" among a heap of other android handsets is telling. If they were to get rid of most of the lineup of garbage that few people want, they'd be able to sell more of the higher end models at a lower price due to cheaper cost of manufacturing. Henry Ford worked this stuff out with the Model T.
I get evaluation phones on a regular basis at work. I've had perhaps 3 crashes on various iphones since 2008. I've used the Galaxy S4, The HTC One as examples of recent alternatives. Didn't like either of them. The shipping firmware on the HTC had bugs I stumbled across within a week, the S4 feels unpleasant to hold. And I do not like the android UI. If you do, great. I have zero interest in spending time to "learn how to use" my phone. It is an appliance.
So you understand the Linux kernel source and have personally audited it?
Much better to use XML and thus have the files readable with any XML parser, than design yet another configuration file format that needs yet another configuration file parser to be written.
Plenty of people use OS X to "get things done". About all people "get done" in a satisfactory manner using Linux is network administration.
... seems to work adequately for the 70+ million OS X installs out there.
You get logs on the Mac and plenty of diagnostic tools including dtrace. If the phone is broken you take it back to apple and they give you a new one, but there are diagnostic logs on that too that you can get off it.
Sounds like you're a typical nerd who gets asked to support apple gear and you're out of your depth, so just say "it's crap" because you don't understand it.
Check out samsung's model page for phones. Yes, sure; SOME are minor variations, but there's still a fuck-tonne of different chassis on there.
That's cute. Samsung can't manufacture like apple using slave labour either.
Whilst the iphone is pretty, what apple actually sells is a device you don't have to babysit, that does what it says on the box in a manner that is both attractive and pleasant to use.
The reason many people, myself included by apple gear is because I have spent the past 20 years babysitting computer shit because it half does what it says, needs care to use to ensure it doesn't get malware, etc. I'm fucking over it. I don't care about the theoretical reduced flexibility if the device does what I actually want it to do, and doesn't need babysitting.
Being pretty is a bonus, not the primary motivator.
Because stamping out 100 million copies of a single model (e.g., iphone) is a LOT more cost effective than trying to tool up to stamp out 10 million copies each of 10 different models. Which means that they can increase their profit margin or increase feature set at the same price as they see fit.
You are aware that the write IOPS of your RAIDZ VDEV is the performance of a SINGLE DISK, right?
I ran a home ZFS box with 2 GB in it (1.5 TB of mirrored storage) for 6 months with zero issues using FreeNAS. It's now got 10 GB, for home media streaming use i have noticed basically zero difference. Saturated gig-e with both setups.
Bullshit. You can add different size VDEVs to a pool, it works fine. It auto balances load across them, and no partitioning is required. My current home setup is 2x1 TB and 2x 512 GB mirrors (soon to be replaced with bigger drives, when it is full).
Just accept that you need to add (or replace) disks 2 at a time (mirror VDEVs), and move on. Unless you're dealing with > 20-30 drives, I'd suggest that RAIDZn is a poor choice. Also, the way writes work, making massive raid groups with large numbers of drives in them (i.e., adding another drive to a RAID5, like you would with BTRFS) is a bad idea. Parity RAID In general is a bad idea. Capacity is cheap, performance is not. Parity raid sucks for performance.
Yup. Most people's expansion difficulties are due to retarded pool configurations. If you accept that 1. disk is cheap and 2. mirrors, whilst expensive in terms of disk capacity are way better performance and more flexible, zfs rocks.
People seem to have it stuck in their head that bigger RAID numbers are better, but RAIDZ/RAIDZ2/RAIDZ3 are only really useful when you're dealing with HUGE numbers of disks and performance is not so important. Normally you're far better off creating a larger number of VDEV mirrors, both in terms of performance and in terms of flexibility.
Which brings up another point - those not used to dealing with enterprise storage may not realize that you can/should/maybe want an array with more than one RAID group in it. They end up putting all their disks in one big VDEV which sucks for performance and flexibility, then blame ZFS for not being flexible.
Read how it works, don't make retarded choices based on ignorance, and you'll be fine.
Think about why you want to do that. Normally, it's due to fuck up from not setting your pool up in a sensible manner in the first place. Don't do that.
1 GB of RAM is worth about $20 these days anyhow (less?).
And yes, de-dup is expensive. Most of the time in my experience you get far better benefits from compression anyhow (source: real world enterprise datasets at work).