They do. It's enterprise edition. Currently only available to companies with Software Assurance, but they are apparently planning on making it available to us plebes on a subscription basis ($8/month, I believe)
That's what I was thinking. But if so, I'm wondering what component specifically the parent is referring to, apart from it being just "the audio chip". IS there a specific term?
Well, off the top of my head: -You have to manually manage resources because applications can't be trusted to destroy your ram/battery. This is supposedly improved with Android 6 and 7, but there are very few phones that run those versions. -The interface is far from simple. Every major vendor wants to create their own spin on the UI, so putting two android devices side by side can still result in wildly different interfaces, making it difficult for people to help each other figure things out. -Assuming you even get updates, each subsequent version of android can have a significantly changed UI, forcing you to relearn basic functions.
The entire Android ecosystem, from the manufacturers to the 3rd party developers, are caveat emptor. You can't trust any particular application to not destroy your battery or privacy, nor can you trust the manufacturer to put out a quality product, nor can you trust the manufacturer to provide post-sales support like firmware updates for more than a ridiculously short period of time if at all. Android has become the Windows of the mobile world. Utterly prolific, but it's all one gigantic race to the bottom.
What does it tell you when even Google has started forking their own private version of Android to put on their premium devices?
Meanwhile, Apple is the McDonalds of the mobile world. It's f__king boring, but you know what you're going to get no matter when you buy it or which model of phone you buy. You can be reasonably sure that your phone is going to work day in, day out, unless something unexpected happens. Your battery life isn't going to shrink from a day to a couple hours cause an app you installed decided it needed to run 100% cpu in the background. And you know Apple is going to support you for well past the 'lifetime' of the phone (they dropped support for the 4s last month, making that almost 5 years)
Despite the bendgates 'n whatnot, iphones has a very solid reputation for being reliable, secure and simple. You know, like a phone *should* be.
People who make decent money have a tendency to seriously value their time and arn't willing to spend the time dicking around with their device to make it work.
Buying an expensive item risks you overpaying. Buy a cheap item risks you buying something that isn't fit for purpose, and *all* the money is wasted.
True, but this is the first time (that I am aware of) that it has been considered good enough to be a first class citizen in a major distro. That's a significant milestone.
Because, as I understand it, X11 is a ginormous mess at a level that rivals Internet Explorer. Maintainability and performance is getting worse as a result.
I mean, I can't remember anymore. It's been in development for so long that in my mind it's reached Duke Nukem status. Now I'm going to have to go google it cause I can no longer remember what was supposed to be so good about it.
This is a dunning-kruger problem. The only way you can tell if something is fake or not, is if you already have at least some knowledge about the subject matter. If there's an article from a trusted news source about how Intel put out a 6GHz CPU, the first thing I would do is check if the date is April 1st because I know about the problems involved.
If an article says someone has discovered a liquid form of a higgs-boson condensate, how would I know different? I mean, it's a condensate , obviously it must condense somehow.
And to make matters worse, in the US there are truth in advertising laws but there doesn't seem to be an equivalent for news. At least, I assume that must be the case, because I can't fathom how Fox News could be viable otherwise.
Fake news is nothing new, and certainly not specific to this past election. The only thing different is that people are finally starting to wake up to how serious of a problem it is.
So I saw this article and thought, "Oh neat! This looks like it could be useful, especially if they did a good job of polishing the UI." and I figured I'd check the comments to see what people thought of it, etc.
Aaaaaand as usual, all we have is one flame war after another with people making ad hominem attacks and how people hate Windows or Linux or whatever. (I'm excluding the vast array of racist remarks for my own sanity) But then again, I really shouldn't be surprised at this point.
Has anyone ACTUALLY tried it, and have anything of value to say? Does it work well? Is it easy to configure/use?
It's basically a MITM attack. There's no difference between this and using a malicious network router. In fact, that's exactly what this is. The only difference is that you're connecting directly to the computer and pretending to be a network adapter rather that it being something upstream.
If a malicious actor has physical access to your PC, then this is the *least* of your worries. There are all sorts of things that could be done.
Except that it's *not* easy for would-be victims to avoid. It is infinitely easier for a hostile person to find their victim, than it is for a victim to hide their tracks, especially when said victim can't or doesn't want to maintain total anonymity.
How is it acceptable that the solution to cyberbullying is to completely withdraw from all online life? Because that's the *only* way to limit it. And I say limit, because it *still* doesn't necessarily stop it.
Your constitution was invented long before the concept of the internet was even a glimmer in someone's eye, where speech took effort instead of 30 seconds on a keyboard. There were natural limits to it then. Those limits no longer exist, and so new limits need to be put in place to compensate.
That doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense. Anonymity doesn't help the victim in any way at all unless the victim is trying to hide from *everyone*. That means not maintaining contact with *anyone* including friends and family.
Meanwhile, anonymity is great when you want to perform targeted attacks without getting caught.
It's (not very) ironic that this article appears directly before the online cyberbullying article.
Even ignoring places like China which heavily censure what people can do online, it's becoming more clear by the day that giving people the freedom to say whatever they want online without accountability is a bloody nightmare.
Cyberbullying has become prolific. Twitter might as well be bought out by 4chan. One news outlet after another is shuttering their comments section because the discussions are basically guaranteed to turn into flamewars or worse. People don't *deserve* to have freedom they have right now. Freedom requires personal responsibility, and the average person is clearly unable to handle that.
Tightening things down is inevitable, cause we can't have nice things.
Slashdot Mirror
Except that's not true (unless Microsoft has changed their minds again).
The lowest Microsoft will permit you to go is Basic unless you are using Enterprise Edition.
They do. It's enterprise edition. Currently only available to companies with Software Assurance, but they are apparently planning on making it available to us plebes on a subscription basis ($8/month, I believe)
Sysadmin. Basically the antithesis of Marketing. ;)
That's what I was thinking. But if so, I'm wondering what component specifically the parent is referring to, apart from it being just "the audio chip". IS there a specific term?
Is CODEC the right acronym? Do you mean DAC? I know a codec to be the format in which a signal is encoded by software.
Well, off the top of my head:
-You have to manually manage resources because applications can't be trusted to destroy your ram/battery. This is supposedly improved with Android 6 and 7, but there are very few phones that run those versions.
-The interface is far from simple. Every major vendor wants to create their own spin on the UI, so putting two android devices side by side can still result in wildly different interfaces, making it difficult for people to help each other figure things out.
-Assuming you even get updates, each subsequent version of android can have a significantly changed UI, forcing you to relearn basic functions.
The entire Android ecosystem, from the manufacturers to the 3rd party developers, are caveat emptor. You can't trust any particular application to not destroy your battery or privacy, nor can you trust the manufacturer to put out a quality product, nor can you trust the manufacturer to provide post-sales support like firmware updates for more than a ridiculously short period of time if at all. Android has become the Windows of the mobile world. Utterly prolific, but it's all one gigantic race to the bottom.
What does it tell you when even Google has started forking their own private version of Android to put on their premium devices?
Meanwhile, Apple is the McDonalds of the mobile world. It's f__king boring, but you know what you're going to get no matter when you buy it or which model of phone you buy. You can be reasonably sure that your phone is going to work day in, day out, unless something unexpected happens. Your battery life isn't going to shrink from a day to a couple hours cause an app you installed decided it needed to run 100% cpu in the background. And you know Apple is going to support you for well past the 'lifetime' of the phone (they dropped support for the 4s last month, making that almost 5 years)
Despite the bendgates 'n whatnot, iphones has a very solid reputation for being reliable, secure and simple. You know, like a phone *should* be.
People who make decent money have a tendency to seriously value their time and arn't willing to spend the time dicking around with their device to make it work.
Buying an expensive item risks you overpaying. Buy a cheap item risks you buying something that isn't fit for purpose, and *all* the money is wasted.
That is a great point. However... What's the likelyhood that it will even occur to the average person to do that, let alone the process involved?
True, but this is the first time (that I am aware of) that it has been considered good enough to be a first class citizen in a major distro. That's a significant milestone.
Because, as I understand it, X11 is a ginormous mess at a level that rivals Internet Explorer. Maintainability and performance is getting worse as a result.
Seriously? Isn't Wayland kind of a big deal?
I mean, I can't remember anymore. It's been in development for so long that in my mind it's reached Duke Nukem status. Now I'm going to have to go google it cause I can no longer remember what was supposed to be so good about it.
This is a dunning-kruger problem. The only way you can tell if something is fake or not, is if you already have at least some knowledge about the subject matter. If there's an article from a trusted news source about how Intel put out a 6GHz CPU, the first thing I would do is check if the date is April 1st because I know about the problems involved.
If an article says someone has discovered a liquid form of a higgs-boson condensate, how would I know different? I mean, it's a condensate , obviously it must condense somehow.
And to make matters worse, in the US there are truth in advertising laws but there doesn't seem to be an equivalent for news. At least, I assume that must be the case, because I can't fathom how Fox News could be viable otherwise.
Fake news is nothing new, and certainly not specific to this past election. The only thing different is that people are finally starting to wake up to how serious of a problem it is.
So I saw this article and thought, "Oh neat! This looks like it could be useful, especially if they did a good job of polishing the UI." and I figured I'd check the comments to see what people thought of it, etc.
Aaaaaand as usual, all we have is one flame war after another with people making ad hominem attacks and how people hate Windows or Linux or whatever. (I'm excluding the vast array of racist remarks for my own sanity) But then again, I really shouldn't be surprised at this point.
Has anyone ACTUALLY tried it, and have anything of value to say? Does it work well? Is it easy to configure/use?
I guess it's time to find an alternative service.
Pffft. You really think I'm going to let facts get in the way of my cherished opinions?
It's times like this I wish I could mod posts on the same article I posted a comment on.
*crickets*
It's basically a MITM attack. There's no difference between this and using a malicious network router. In fact, that's exactly what this is. The only difference is that you're connecting directly to the computer and pretending to be a network adapter rather that it being something upstream.
If a malicious actor has physical access to your PC, then this is the *least* of your worries. There are all sorts of things that could be done.
Because (and someone had to explain this to me, but one seen, can never be unseen) it looks like an erect penis.
Cause I don't see that stupid eggplant often enough already.
Considering it's a brand new machine, I would *expect* that the GPU would be better.
Also considering that the base model starts at three freaking grand, I expect that GPU to be even be able to play Crysis at max settings!
Except that it's *not* easy for would-be victims to avoid. It is infinitely easier for a hostile person to find their victim, than it is for a victim to hide their tracks, especially when said victim can't or doesn't want to maintain total anonymity.
How is it acceptable that the solution to cyberbullying is to completely withdraw from all online life? Because that's the *only* way to limit it. And I say limit, because it *still* doesn't necessarily stop it.
Your constitution was invented long before the concept of the internet was even a glimmer in someone's eye, where speech took effort instead of 30 seconds on a keyboard. There were natural limits to it then. Those limits no longer exist, and so new limits need to be put in place to compensate.
That doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense. Anonymity doesn't help the victim in any way at all unless the victim is trying to hide from *everyone*. That means not maintaining contact with *anyone* including friends and family.
Meanwhile, anonymity is great when you want to perform targeted attacks without getting caught.
You really didn't think this through, did you?
It's (not very) ironic that this article appears directly before the online cyberbullying article.
Even ignoring places like China which heavily censure what people can do online, it's becoming more clear by the day that giving people the freedom to say whatever they want online without accountability is a bloody nightmare.
Cyberbullying has become prolific. Twitter might as well be bought out by 4chan. One news outlet after another is shuttering their comments section because the discussions are basically guaranteed to turn into flamewars or worse. People don't *deserve* to have freedom they have right now. Freedom requires personal responsibility, and the average person is clearly unable to handle that.
Tightening things down is inevitable, cause we can't have nice things.
The last time someone did that, he ended up building an evil sentient supercomputer and Superman had to bail him out.