iPad mini is a joke. In a market where price and small size are the key differentiators, Apple decides to differentiate by making theirs bigger and more expensive with worse specs than the incumbents?? Somebody in Cupertino is on crack, pure and simple. Buyers not buying Apple, in droves. Steve Cook looking for a new smokescreen to keep his job another few months. Expect more sacrificial firings.
The most remarkable thing about the iPad at launch was its price:) something Apple seem to have forgotten.
Apple didn't forget it, it's just they have painted themselves into a corner. With no new magic products of any significance to pick up the iShiny torch there is exactly one way to grow profits for next year and thus allow the executive suite to hang onto its proverbial meal tickets for yet another year. That one way: squeeze more money out of existing products. That means: no sales, no price cuts, no deals, except on obsolete junk that might as well be binned. And naturally, that strategy ends in doom for Apple. Which is just fine with me given that Apple does not even bother to try to hide its true nature any more.
Anything in a computer that calls itself 'Secure' isn't. Secure Boot is a false sense of security that will lead people to think they are safe. Secure Boot is Microsoft's Security against competition.
Agreed, Secure Boot is just Microsoft returning to its usual illegal business thuggery and hoping not to get slapped with $billions of fines this time. I would care about it if I thought the Surface would be a big hit but it's a thud so this is mostly entertainment. Great entertainment, like Laurel and Hardy trying to be evil.
You have serious issues with reading, my friend. The guy clearly says:
That seems a bug at pulseaudio.
Which is obviously false and a pitiful attempt to put the blame where it does not belong.
That's not as clear as you profess. Irrespective of whether it is ok to change kernel error codes gratuitously, or to return entirely incorrect ones as in this case, the Pulseaudio code is clearly crap as well, which if properly written to field unanticipated errors, would have just kept on working. There is no excuse for the kernel api change in question, but there is also no excuse for the quality of the Pulseaudio code.
Linus is an egotistical bastard who doesn't care what anyone thinks anyway, so mere words aren't likely to change anything.
Ah, that's not entirely true. Sometimes he screws up so badly that even he recognizes the need to come up with some sort of backhanded apology. Example: after the Bitkeeper/McVoy fiasco, why do you suppose he called it Git?
He cares more about the product being right than other peoples' opinion of him.
If that were true then he could simply have not accepted the patch, as is his perogative. Please do not apologize for unacceptable social behavior just because you are a fan. I am also a fan, but not of this toxic bad acting.
Linus' developed Linux as a hobby; it's not his profession, so it follows he doesn't have to be professional.
Wow I am impressed with the number of apologists coming out of the woodwork. Linux used to be Linus's hobby, for a short time, then it quickly became his profession, his claim to fame, and his meal ticket. By the way, I admire Linus as an engineer and organizer, and I used to admire him as a person as well.
To be fair, the error code in question was a completely stupid error code to use in that situation, which is probably why PulseAudio didn't anticipate it.
That is true, but Linus was still being an ass, and unfortunately, seems to be doing his utmost to establish a reputation as a geek bully who uses his success as a club to beat up enthusiastic volunteers. He should know better. And this is not the first time, far from it.
Unbeknownst to Steve, his new liver was infected with zombie juice. He didn't stay buried long. Hordes of zombies wielding iPhones now attacking New York subways, lead by Steve or what remains of him.
Good, finally an injection of facts in the thread. Yes, a shrew brain actually has the throughput of something like a supercomputer's worth of GPUs, if you believe the estimate of 100 million mips for a human, which is based on an extrapolation of the processing power of the retina. This could be out a few orders of magnitude in either direction, however the point is... we already have the processing power, but not the algorithms, to simulate a shrew. We're getting fairly competent with nematodes but the algorithms don't just scale up, there remain algorithms used by natural brains that we don't yet have the slightest clue of.
It is getting harder and harder over time to launch novel software stacks. As new computer programs depend on ever larger and more stable platforms, inertia naturally means that the rate of "real" change is less now than it was earlier in the evolution of computer programs.
Eh, I just stated that our software algorithms suck, and that the dark ages of Microsoft set the whole effort back by ten years. You just restated that. And I said you can scarcely imagine the progress that is coming, which you definitely just proved.
One thing is abundantly clear: the age of the single processor Intel dinosaurs stalking the earth is drawing to a close and the age of massively parallel, power efficient computation has already started, possibly not including significant leadership from Intel.
The only the silicon part of the revolution is slowing down. The software revolution has barely begun, especially after being set back ten years or so during the Microsoft dark ages. What the future holds can scarcely be imagined today. Think of it this way: we already have more processing available on a single, $50, add in card than a modest sized mammalian brain. It isn't our hardware that sucks, it's our algorithms.
all told unless the price is substantially different we're not talking a big deal. If you pay $5 more for your x86 tablet you won't really care
You're in outer space. Intel can't get by on $5/tablet, they need at least $50 or they will soon need to sell their head office. There is no way Intel can compete with ARM's royalty structure while continuing to live in the manner to which they have become accustomed.
Even if true (watch out for cognitive dissonsoance with respect to Intel power efficiency claims) it does not mean a thing if Intel cannot match the price. Currently something like $1 goes to ARM holdings per chip. Lets see a bloated old monopolist get by on that.
Slashdot Mirror
iPad mini is a joke. In a market where price and small size are the key differentiators, Apple decides to differentiate by making theirs bigger and more expensive with worse specs than the incumbents?? Somebody in Cupertino is on crack, pure and simple. Buyers not buying Apple, in droves. Steve Cook looking for a new smokescreen to keep his job another few months. Expect more sacrificial firings.
Because there's only one item on any true iFan's wish list: I wish I wasn't overdrawn at the bank so I could put another iShiny on my credit card!
The most remarkable thing about the iPad at launch was its price :) something Apple seem to have forgotten.
Apple didn't forget it, it's just they have painted themselves into a corner. With no new magic products of any significance to pick up the iShiny torch there is exactly one way to grow profits for next year and thus allow the executive suite to hang onto its proverbial meal tickets for yet another year. That one way: squeeze more money out of existing products. That means: no sales, no price cuts, no deals, except on obsolete junk that might as well be binned. And naturally, that strategy ends in doom for Apple. Which is just fine with me given that Apple does not even bother to try to hide its true nature any more.
I don't know whether Microsoft realises it but we'll all look back on this as the beginning of the end for them.
It's the continuation of the end. The beginning of the end was when Minimsft was captured and lobotomized.
Anything in a computer that calls itself 'Secure' isn't. Secure Boot is a false sense of security that will lead people to think they are safe. Secure Boot is Microsoft's Security against competition.
Agreed, Secure Boot is just Microsoft returning to its usual illegal business thuggery and hoping not to get slapped with $billions of fines this time. I would care about it if I thought the Surface would be a big hit but it's a thud so this is mostly entertainment. Great entertainment, like Laurel and Hardy trying to be evil.
What problem does Secure Boot solve, other than Microsoft's "other OS" problem?
Secure Boot satisfies Steve Ballmer's compulsive need to piss on the shoes of antitrust regulators.
Don't get carried away with yourself, it was a release candidate. There is no excuse whatsover for anybody to be a complete ass, including you.
I can't help but be amused at the irony of someone with a username of "Tough Love" thinking a little public ass-chewing is inappropriate.
When Tough Love thinks it's over the top, it's really over the top.
It was pretty easy to draw you over to the dark side...
Not much of an achievement in my case.
It's hairyfeet, don't expect poetry.
You have serious issues with reading, my friend. The guy clearly says:
That seems a bug at pulseaudio.
Which is obviously false and a pitiful attempt to put the blame where it does not belong.
That's not as clear as you profess. Irrespective of whether it is ok to change kernel error codes gratuitously, or to return entirely incorrect ones as in this case, the Pulseaudio code is clearly crap as well, which if properly written to field unanticipated errors, would have just kept on working. There is no excuse for the kernel api change in question, but there is also no excuse for the quality of the Pulseaudio code.
Linus is an egotistical bastard who doesn't care what anyone thinks anyway, so mere words aren't likely to change anything.
Ah, that's not entirely true. Sometimes he screws up so badly that even he recognizes the need to come up with some sort of backhanded apology. Example: after the Bitkeeper/McVoy fiasco, why do you suppose he called it Git?
He cares more about the product being right than other peoples' opinion of him.
If that were true then he could simply have not accepted the patch, as is his perogative. Please do not apologize for unacceptable social behavior just because you are a fan. I am also a fan, but not of this toxic bad acting.
Linus' developed Linux as a hobby; it's not his profession, so it follows he doesn't have to be professional.
Wow I am impressed with the number of apologists coming out of the woodwork. Linux used to be Linus's hobby, for a short time, then it quickly became his profession, his claim to fame, and his meal ticket. By the way, I admire Linus as an engineer and organizer, and I used to admire him as a person as well.
This guy screwed up BAD. He needed a public ass-chewing, as a warning to others.
Don't get carried away with yourself, it was a release candidate. There is no excuse whatsover for anybody to be a complete ass, including you.
To be fair, the error code in question was a completely stupid error code to use in that situation, which is probably why PulseAudio didn't anticipate it.
That is true, but Linus was still being an ass, and unfortunately, seems to be doing his utmost to establish a reputation as a geek bully who uses his success as a club to beat up enthusiastic volunteers. He should know better. And this is not the first time, far from it.
You may have slapped together something in 12 hours, but that doesn't make it any good.
Hah, you obviously haven't read the code that recent grads crap out.
Unbeknownst to Steve, his new liver was infected with zombie juice. He didn't stay buried long. Hordes of zombies wielding iPhones now attacking New York subways, lead by Steve or what remains of him.
Good, finally an injection of facts in the thread. Yes, a shrew brain actually has the throughput of something like a supercomputer's worth of GPUs, if you believe the estimate of 100 million mips for a human, which is based on an extrapolation of the processing power of the retina. This could be out a few orders of magnitude in either direction, however the point is... we already have the processing power, but not the algorithms, to simulate a shrew. We're getting fairly competent with nematodes but the algorithms don't just scale up, there remain algorithms used by natural brains that we don't yet have the slightest clue of.
Microsoft rode the wave. They didn't make the wave.
Worse, Microsoft flattened the wave with their fat, dead hands.
The algorithms are already here.
Good for you for knowing all algorithms, including those not yet invented.
It is getting harder and harder over time to launch novel software stacks. As new computer programs depend on ever larger and more stable platforms, inertia naturally means that the rate of "real" change is less now than it was earlier in the evolution of computer programs.
Eh, I just stated that our software algorithms suck, and that the dark ages of Microsoft set the whole effort back by ten years. You just restated that. And I said you can scarcely imagine the progress that is coming, which you definitely just proved.
One thing is abundantly clear: the age of the single processor Intel dinosaurs stalking the earth is drawing to a close and the age of massively parallel, power efficient computation has already started, possibly not including significant leadership from Intel.
The only the silicon part of the revolution is slowing down. The software revolution has barely begun, especially after being set back ten years or so during the Microsoft dark ages. What the future holds can scarcely be imagined today. Think of it this way: we already have more processing available on a single, $50, add in card than a modest sized mammalian brain. It isn't our hardware that sucks, it's our algorithms.
all told unless the price is substantially different we're not talking a big deal. If you pay $5 more for your x86 tablet you won't really care
You're in outer space. Intel can't get by on $5/tablet, they need at least $50 or they will soon need to sell their head office. There is no way Intel can compete with ARM's royalty structure while continuing to live in the manner to which they have become accustomed.
Even if true (watch out for cognitive dissonsoance with respect to Intel power efficiency claims) it does not mean a thing if Intel cannot match the price. Currently something like $1 goes to ARM holdings per chip. Lets see a bloated old monopolist get by on that.
Apple is just lucky that Steve Jobs never tried to peddle iBoats. Maybe somebody already had the patent on rounded boat corners?