But the updaters of newer versions of popular Windows applications have become more bloated.
Citation required. Let's have a gander shall we: Adobe Update Service: Active working set 648KB Java Update Scheduler: Active working set 1,759KB Google Update Service: Unfortunately even on this shitty hotel internet connection the service starts and stops so quickly that I can't even see how much memory it uses. But for shits and giggles: It's a 140KB executable.
I'm sorry I take it all back. These result surprised me. I stand corrected: You should be able to run all these just fine on a 486 too.
Now if you have a lot of HDD activity loading these services, maybe its time to throw out the HDD since it is clearly failing.
When a bunch of updaters are running, that's pegged at 100%, which can take a minute or more.
Yep, your computer's broken. 100% I/O on disk to load these updaters, you have either a horrible problem in your system or failing hardware.
In my experience, CPU time and memory footprint are less relevant to responsiveness at login than HDD usage time.
Agreed, however how much disk do you use to load a tiny executable which does barely anything for a split second into borderline non-existent memory?
So for someone whose PC's preinstalled operating system's support period has ended, my advice is "backup user profiles, wipe, and Linux".
That I fully agree with. Especially if someone hasn't upgraded their computer since the Core2 / Vista days, it's unlikely they are emotionally attached to specific Windows only software.
The burden of proof is on you to measure and report.
But you won't believe anything I say so what's the point. I have said directly how to verify the claims yourself. Go forth and feed thyself and stop rely on the spoons of others.
You don't need to doubt the claim. You can actually *measure* it using the startup optimisation tools MS offers. In there you'll see you can happily use your computer while those nasty background services you incorrectly claim are making the hourglass spin (they don't, that's the whole point of background service) are quickly loaded. (yes I went back and read the rest of your post... we'll get to that)
To be clear you're talking about people running Vista, widely know for taking forever to boot, and are speeding it up by stopping a program that uses almost no resources and has buggerall system footprint. You've missed the point, no... you've wasted your time.
But honestly your entire post makes no sense. You're comparing an update check to something that actively scans every file when it is accessed. That is stupid. You're also talking about Chrome crashing which is just completely irrelevant since Chrome starting has nothing to do with Chrome's updater (system service remember). You must be thinking of Firefox which runs its updater every time your launch the browser.
It may surprise you to know that Core2Duos haven't gotten any slower, and these updators most definitely existed back in the day too (actually we seem to have less of them now). You want benchmarks? Make some. The tools are available. Or use some common sense such as examining the CPU time or memory footprint of the processes on any machine so you can see how completely and utterly irrelevant they actually are.
Side note: Yes you absolutely should tell those pensioners to throw away Vista, and if their Core2Duos can't run Windows 7 or Linux then throw away the entire PC. Doing anything else for an OS connected to the internet no longer receiving security updates is nothing other than reckless.
what we are now living through is an ongoing catastrophe.
I know, I see the Facebook posts about it. From the #deletefacbook movement we have officially reached peak-missing-the-point.
By the way half of America* has a short attention spam. They are too busy worrying about crying babies on the border to even remember why Facebook was in the news.
The definition I gave was the one which comes up in the Google search I linked.
Congratulations. English definitions don't trump economic theory. The dictionary doesn't trump general understanding.... unless it is you talk exclusively to people who write dictionaries, in which case you'll get along just fine.
Now you're either illiterate or trolling.
Go read an economic textbook sometime, or just talk to other people to see if they think this is a shortage. What *you* think, and what *you* can find a reference to doesn't help you communicate with others.
Again, you're by yourself here saying there's no shortage.
To claim "no one in the world" agrees with a definition based on most dictionaries is an obvious falsehood
The dictionary is absolutely full of words that are not used in language, not understood with the published meaning in common use, or not better still not understood at all. Communication is about making yourself understood. Unless you communicate exclusively with english majors you're going to find yourself having a pointless argument about something everyone else would happily disagree with.
Yeah I stopped reading right there because you clearly missed the absurdity of disabling something that uses effectively no resources for "performance gains".
Or will their most popular product which they themselves promoted in the results, collected money for and shipped to consumers defective result in absolutely no negative effect on them and thus incentivise them to continue the practice?
You just gave a range that is larger than the cost of manufacturer of the rest of the device. Is your $15 detector crap, or does it have a quality $10 sensor with $5 of cheap electronics around it? In the case of these devices, the sensor IS the cost of the device. The rest of it is borderline free.
Also testing for a single device isn't cheap or easy because you need calibration and test equipment. That ads almost nothing to the cost when you spread it over 1000 sales on multiple different units.
To be clear you're probably right that this was some gungho idiot making some blind design and shipping it on the cheap, but you can not universally tell that from the price.
"Just as" is stretching it. Sure between the man hating senseless leadership, the diversity hire deciding she's a better pilot than a pilot followed by dooming the entire resistance and saving a guy from making a selfless sacrifice in the name of "love", only to be saved by Mary Sue who figured out the force in a day, the new series may be a bit of a turd....
But meesa can only imagine how bad they would have been had George Lucas made them.
This is quite literally Trump's trade war in action.
I like to crap on Trump as much as anyone, actually probably more so, but this.... this looks like a continuation of Tesla's end game. It made no sense for Tesla to be in the business of selling generic solar panels through Home Depot, and quite telling is this restructuring isn't actually affecting Tesla's core solar product, their actual solar roof.
If you can't obtain more of something, it's a shortage.
Like when you can't obtain more of something for the same price. It's a shortage.
Look you can try and redefine 200 years of economic theory if you want. No one will listen. But by all means double down on your silly definition that no one in the world agrees with. It is quite amazing those people most pedantically claiming they are backed by the english language also seem to be the ones who are unable to communicate with others.
In this case, you can just go buy from a different supplier with higher shipping costs, so no shortage exists.
Enjoy your opinion. One that isn't shared by anyone else in the world. You get an A for effort and an F for communication skills.
Oh you're talking about the car navigation system not the feed. Right. Well that makes everything you said irrelevant since the car navigates using LIDAR and doesn't care how light or dark it is.
You're *not* trying to store it so it's irrelevant what a dashcam can or cannot do. (Your brain is not trying to store it either after all.)
Side note: Your brain definitely stores it. Your vision is actually quite horrible. What you see is made up of an assessment of a lot of "stored frames" each individually quite horrible. But our brain is great at building a visual world out of a continuous crappy feed.
Why does chrome need 4 processes before it displays a home/start page?
Why do you care? If anything it will ensure a single process doesn't bring down the browser. Then you also get speed increases for non-threaded workloads on multicore CPUs. In other news MySQL is currently using 33 processes on my machine processing a grand total of zero requests for zero users with zero CPU time. Are you running out of numbers to assign processes or something?
Why does google schedule update checks once at logon and then *every hour*?
Why wouldn't it? Google's threat and malware database is being continuously updated. Are you on a 28.8k modem where you can't spare the couple of kilobyte to do a web request to check if any components of your system's security have an update?
Change the frequency of google's updates back to once per day, and NOT at logon.
Why are you sacrafacing other people's security for no performance gain? Or are you trying to "tune" up computers that are too slow to fire up a process and run a web request? Maybe they should consider browsing the internet on a computer instead of a TI-84.
Ditto Adobe's products
Ditto the above. Adobe's update service uses less than 1MB of RAM and 0% CPU time while it exists. If you're getting a "performance tuneup" as a result of disabling it then maybe it's time to throw the old 486 away.
This. If there's one thing that's clear these days it's that people don't give a crap about their privacy providing that someone doesn't look in their window and get a peek of their nipple or penis.
This might be a valid strategy for Firefox future.
What makes you say that? All the Facebook users? The people who happily click "next" whenever they see a privacy statement? All those Windows 10 users happily sending data to the borg?
If there's one thing that is clear it is that privacy is NOT a valid strategy for increasing market share. All but a few people stopped caring about that long ago.
In my mind a lower level of service deserves a lower tip.
Your mind makes sense, but the result is still disenfranchising the person who still has their job for no good reason. You guys have built a culture of not paying for dinner the price listed on the menu now to help make your servers be able to afford to eat at night, why should the tablet change that?
If these basic pieces of service are not all present, I didn't get full service and I tip accordingly.
You almost sound like a european where a tip is somehow representative of the service rather than a basic expectation of the waiting staff's wages.
I'm not saying it's wrong, just that it's incompatible with the retarded way the American service industry is set up.
No they are limitations of display. Your eyes in realtime adjust every point dynamically. You can do that in software too, and the result looks like shit. There's a reason when you take a photo into the sunset everything around you looks black, and that's because the alternative looks like garbage.
Also you want to capture realtime video in HDR with almost no compression? Good luck with your technology. Your $200 dashcam suddenly isn't.
No, but manufacturers communicating with distributors months ago and those distributors independently increasing inventory could have averted the whole mess.
This side of the industry doesn't store and distribute. Most manufacturers bottle and ship in B2B transactions without middlemen. Heck in many cases they also ship Business to Consumer without distributors in between. Having distributors could somewhat smooth over this problem though.
I conclude that this is the market running around with it's pants around its ankles.
JIT is a staple of the process industry. The only reason you don't constantly run out of fuel everytime there's a hiccup is because of laws requiring some level of reserve for national security reasons. You can compare different countries to see that the industry will do it's best to achieve the bare minimum reserves where possible, and even with such reserves there's usually a big price shock whenever an unplanned outage occurs.
It's worth pointing out that this type of response by drivers is predictable.
No it's not. Gaze wandering. Boredom. Not paying full attention. All of that is predictable as it is when doing any boring job.
On the other hand pretty much every job out there if you're caught sitting down watching TV when you're supposed to be on the clock, expect to be disciplined. There's "not being attentive" and then there's "not being there mentally at all". This is the latter.
You have no clue how good the human eye is and how poor a digital replica is, do you?
The GP is narrow minded. CCDs are definitely far more sensitive than the human eye but they suffer greatly in the way the resulting image is processed. All the sensitivity in the world doesn't help if you clip the highlights, compress the result to 8bit, and display it on a shitty monitor with a 200:1 contrast ratio.
It shouldn't. Silicon devices should be much more sensitive than human eyes. Someone cheaped out?
Yes they are, and the result is that we take this awesome footage and through 99% of the data away and cram it into an 8bpp representation on a display with a woeful contrast ratio.
The wonders of the human eye is not that it's more sensitive than silicon, but rather that it is more selective and as such we are able to see phenomenal amounts of dynamic range that can not only not be captured by silicon, but also not displayed properly as a result.
Either way, I guarantee the road did not appear anywhere near as dark as in that video.
Slashdot Mirror
But the updaters of newer versions of popular Windows applications have become more bloated.
Citation required. Let's have a gander shall we:
Adobe Update Service: Active working set 648KB
Java Update Scheduler: Active working set 1,759KB
Google Update Service: Unfortunately even on this shitty hotel internet connection the service starts and stops so quickly that I can't even see how much memory it uses. But for shits and giggles: It's a 140KB executable.
I'm sorry I take it all back. These result surprised me. I stand corrected: You should be able to run all these just fine on a 486 too.
Now if you have a lot of HDD activity loading these services, maybe its time to throw out the HDD since it is clearly failing.
When a bunch of updaters are running, that's pegged at 100%, which can take a minute or more.
Yep, your computer's broken. 100% I/O on disk to load these updaters, you have either a horrible problem in your system or failing hardware.
In my experience, CPU time and memory footprint are less relevant to responsiveness at login than HDD usage time.
Agreed, however how much disk do you use to load a tiny executable which does barely anything for a split second into borderline non-existent memory?
So for someone whose PC's preinstalled operating system's support period has ended, my advice is "backup user profiles, wipe, and Linux".
That I fully agree with. Especially if someone hasn't upgraded their computer since the Core2 / Vista days, it's unlikely they are emotionally attached to specific Windows only software.
The burden of proof is on you to measure and report.
But you won't believe anything I say so what's the point. I have said directly how to verify the claims yourself.
Go forth and feed thyself and stop rely on the spoons of others.
Who are these people that care enough about their lives to buy CO detectors
The same poor people who are likely to have CO leaks. That's a vicious cycle in an of itself.
Oh and landlords. Bastards that they are.
You don't need to doubt the claim. You can actually *measure* it using the startup optimisation tools MS offers. In there you'll see you can happily use your computer while those nasty background services you incorrectly claim are making the hourglass spin (they don't, that's the whole point of background service) are quickly loaded. (yes I went back and read the rest of your post... we'll get to that)
To be clear you're talking about people running Vista, widely know for taking forever to boot, and are speeding it up by stopping a program that uses almost no resources and has buggerall system footprint. You've missed the point, no ... you've wasted your time.
But honestly your entire post makes no sense. You're comparing an update check to something that actively scans every file when it is accessed. That is stupid. You're also talking about Chrome crashing which is just completely irrelevant since Chrome starting has nothing to do with Chrome's updater (system service remember). You must be thinking of Firefox which runs its updater every time your launch the browser.
It may surprise you to know that Core2Duos haven't gotten any slower, and these updators most definitely existed back in the day too (actually we seem to have less of them now). You want benchmarks? Make some. The tools are available. Or use some common sense such as examining the CPU time or memory footprint of the processes on any machine so you can see how completely and utterly irrelevant they actually are.
Side note: Yes you absolutely should tell those pensioners to throw away Vista, and if their Core2Duos can't run Windows 7 or Linux then throw away the entire PC. Doing anything else for an OS connected to the internet no longer receiving security updates is nothing other than reckless.
what we are now living through is an ongoing catastrophe.
I know, I see the Facebook posts about it. From the #deletefacbook movement we have officially reached peak-missing-the-point.
By the way half of America* has a short attention spam. They are too busy worrying about crying babies on the border to even remember why Facebook was in the news.
*Nearly all of America.
The definition I gave was the one which comes up in the Google search I linked.
Congratulations. English definitions don't trump economic theory. The dictionary doesn't trump general understanding.... unless it is you talk exclusively to people who write dictionaries, in which case you'll get along just fine.
Now you're either illiterate or trolling.
Go read an economic textbook sometime, or just talk to other people to see if they think this is a shortage. What *you* think, and what *you* can find a reference to doesn't help you communicate with others.
Again, you're by yourself here saying there's no shortage.
To claim "no one in the world" agrees with a definition based on most dictionaries is an obvious falsehood
The dictionary is absolutely full of words that are not used in language, not understood with the published meaning in common use, or not better still not understood at all. Communication is about making yourself understood. Unless you communicate exclusively with english majors you're going to find yourself having a pointless argument about something everyone else would happily disagree with.
Not everyone has the latest and greatest hardware
Yeah I stopped reading right there because you clearly missed the absurdity of disabling something that uses effectively no resources for "performance gains".
Or will their most popular product which they themselves promoted in the results, collected money for and shipped to consumers defective result in absolutely no negative effect on them and thus incentivise them to continue the practice?
in that range
You just gave a range that is larger than the cost of manufacturer of the rest of the device. Is your $15 detector crap, or does it have a quality $10 sensor with $5 of cheap electronics around it? In the case of these devices, the sensor IS the cost of the device. The rest of it is borderline free.
Also testing for a single device isn't cheap or easy because you need calibration and test equipment. That ads almost nothing to the cost when you spread it over 1000 sales on multiple different units.
To be clear you're probably right that this was some gungho idiot making some blind design and shipping it on the cheap, but you can not universally tell that from the price.
In other words, assuming autosteer really is improving safety, then statistically speaking, the nags are making the car LESS safe, not more.
Or you can just leave your hands on the wheel and pay attention while the car does the heavy lifting.
Or maybe scientists and researchers should have some ethics to make sure their studies are valid and repeatable before pushing claims?
Scientists don't publish claims, they publish results. The media publishes claims.
"Just as" is stretching it. Sure between the man hating senseless leadership, the diversity hire deciding she's a better pilot than a pilot followed by dooming the entire resistance and saving a guy from making a selfless sacrifice in the name of "love", only to be saved by Mary Sue who figured out the force in a day, the new series may be a bit of a turd. ...
But meesa can only imagine how bad they would have been had George Lucas made them.
This is quite literally Trump's trade war in action.
I like to crap on Trump as much as anyone, actually probably more so, but this.... this looks like a continuation of Tesla's end game. It made no sense for Tesla to be in the business of selling generic solar panels through Home Depot, and quite telling is this restructuring isn't actually affecting Tesla's core solar product, their actual solar roof.
If you can't obtain more of something, it's a shortage.
Like when you can't obtain more of something for the same price. It's a shortage.
Look you can try and redefine 200 years of economic theory if you want. No one will listen. But by all means double down on your silly definition that no one in the world agrees with. It is quite amazing those people most pedantically claiming they are backed by the english language also seem to be the ones who are unable to communicate with others.
In this case, you can just go buy from a different supplier with higher shipping costs, so no shortage exists.
Enjoy your opinion. One that isn't shared by anyone else in the world. You get an A for effort and an F for communication skills.
Man complaining about sexual assault demands twice non-consensual sex from another person.
Wow you don't know what fuck you means. That's quite impressive.
Fuck you.
Oh you're talking about the car navigation system not the feed. Right. Well that makes everything you said irrelevant since the car navigates using LIDAR and doesn't care how light or dark it is.
You're *not* trying to store it so it's irrelevant what a dashcam can or cannot do. (Your brain is not trying to store it either after all.)
Side note: Your brain definitely stores it. Your vision is actually quite horrible. What you see is made up of an assessment of a lot of "stored frames" each individually quite horrible. But our brain is great at building a visual world out of a continuous crappy feed.
Why does chrome need 4 processes before it displays a home/start page?
Why do you care? If anything it will ensure a single process doesn't bring down the browser. Then you also get speed increases for non-threaded workloads on multicore CPUs.
In other news MySQL is currently using 33 processes on my machine processing a grand total of zero requests for zero users with zero CPU time. Are you running out of numbers to assign processes or something?
Why does google schedule update checks once at logon and then *every hour*?
Why wouldn't it? Google's threat and malware database is being continuously updated. Are you on a 28.8k modem where you can't spare the couple of kilobyte to do a web request to check if any components of your system's security have an update?
Change the frequency of google's updates back to once per day, and NOT at logon.
Why are you sacrafacing other people's security for no performance gain? Or are you trying to "tune" up computers that are too slow to fire up a process and run a web request? Maybe they should consider browsing the internet on a computer instead of a TI-84.
Ditto Adobe's products
Ditto the above. Adobe's update service uses less than 1MB of RAM and 0% CPU time while it exists. If you're getting a "performance tuneup" as a result of disabling it then maybe it's time to throw the old 486 away.
This. If there's one thing that's clear these days it's that people don't give a crap about their privacy providing that someone doesn't look in their window and get a peek of their nipple or penis.
This might be a valid strategy for Firefox future.
What makes you say that? All the Facebook users? The people who happily click "next" whenever they see a privacy statement? All those Windows 10 users happily sending data to the borg?
If there's one thing that is clear it is that privacy is NOT a valid strategy for increasing market share. All but a few people stopped caring about that long ago.
In my mind a lower level of service deserves a lower tip.
Your mind makes sense, but the result is still disenfranchising the person who still has their job for no good reason. You guys have built a culture of not paying for dinner the price listed on the menu now to help make your servers be able to afford to eat at night, why should the tablet change that?
If these basic pieces of service are not all present, I didn't get full service and I tip accordingly.
You almost sound like a european where a tip is somehow representative of the service rather than a basic expectation of the waiting staff's wages.
I'm not saying it's wrong, just that it's incompatible with the retarded way the American service industry is set up.
No they are limitations of display. Your eyes in realtime adjust every point dynamically. You can do that in software too, and the result looks like shit. There's a reason when you take a photo into the sunset everything around you looks black, and that's because the alternative looks like garbage.
Also you want to capture realtime video in HDR with almost no compression? Good luck with your technology. Your $200 dashcam suddenly isn't.
No, but manufacturers communicating with distributors months ago and those distributors independently increasing inventory could have averted the whole mess.
This side of the industry doesn't store and distribute. Most manufacturers bottle and ship in B2B transactions without middlemen. Heck in many cases they also ship Business to Consumer without distributors in between. Having distributors could somewhat smooth over this problem though.
I conclude that this is the market running around with it's pants around its ankles.
JIT is a staple of the process industry. The only reason you don't constantly run out of fuel everytime there's a hiccup is because of laws requiring some level of reserve for national security reasons. You can compare different countries to see that the industry will do it's best to achieve the bare minimum reserves where possible, and even with such reserves there's usually a big price shock whenever an unplanned outage occurs.
It's worth pointing out that this type of response by drivers is predictable.
No it's not. Gaze wandering. Boredom. Not paying full attention. All of that is predictable as it is when doing any boring job.
On the other hand pretty much every job out there if you're caught sitting down watching TV when you're supposed to be on the clock, expect to be disciplined. There's "not being attentive" and then there's "not being there mentally at all". This is the latter.
You have no clue how good the human eye is and how poor a digital replica is, do you?
The GP is narrow minded. CCDs are definitely far more sensitive than the human eye but they suffer greatly in the way the resulting image is processed. All the sensitivity in the world doesn't help if you clip the highlights, compress the result to 8bit, and display it on a shitty monitor with a 200:1 contrast ratio.
It shouldn't. Silicon devices should be much more sensitive than human eyes. Someone cheaped out?
Yes they are, and the result is that we take this awesome footage and through 99% of the data away and cram it into an 8bpp representation on a display with a woeful contrast ratio.
The wonders of the human eye is not that it's more sensitive than silicon, but rather that it is more selective and as such we are able to see phenomenal amounts of dynamic range that can not only not be captured by silicon, but also not displayed properly as a result.
Either way, I guarantee the road did not appear anywhere near as dark as in that video.