I certainly don't consider my pebble watch junk. It delivers all the notifications, weather report, and tells time that's synced over the network. So at this point it already brings a little bit of something new to the table. I don't need to reach out for my phone whenever it beeps. The watch and its software are simplistic, but it costs just $130 for the steel version and runs a week on one charge..
I really like my Pebble Steel watch, but I agree that what we're going to see eventually is Pebble going the way of Palm Pilot simply because of the massively bigger ecosystem of software and developers that Apple and Google's Android have.
Well, I don't believe most people apply this type of standard. More than a week of run time is plenty for most people. We charge our smartphones and many other devices every day, but you can't connect a watch to a charger at the same time?
Anyways, the smartwatch does provide pretty decent utility. Yes, the phone does everything you need, but you need to reach out for it into your pocket. Instead of pulling the smartphone every time it beeps, you can glance first at the smartwatch to see what's up. Once you see the first few lines of the message, email, or other notice, you can then decide if you need to get the smartphone or not.
When it comes to battery life, NOTHING on the market can beat Pebble's first generation Pebble Watch and Pebble Watch Steel. Both of them are actually pretty light, and the Steel is sort of a watch you can wear to a dinner. Both can go a week on a full charge. Even Pebble's own second generation Time and Time Steel run time took a hit when they introduced the color screen.
While I love my Pebble Steel, I do fear Pebble will eventually go down the way of Palm Inc, Walkman, Blueberry and others.
You'd be really surprised how good the first Pebble Watch and it's Steel version are. Specially, Pebble Steel looks good, you don't need to tatoo "I am a nerd" on your forehead, it has always-on screen that's readable in all conditions and goes for over a week without a change. At $130 a pop, the Steel actually looks better than conventional watches for the same price, syncs time over the network, and delivers notifications from your phone. Very good utility IMO.
The second generation Pebbles added color screen, but at the expense of battery. I do agree that Pebble will probably go the way of Palm Inc eventually, or at very best it will remain a sort of geek-oriented underground smartwatch brand.
I have LG phones, but considering all the pain you need to go through to use CM13, I don't know why not just stick with a stock-based ROM. The LG G3 supposedly will get the official MM update soon. My preference is actually just use a stripped down OEM ROM.
PS: in some ways the above also explains why people shy away from AMD CPUs. Nice multithreaded benchmark will show that a quad-core AMD CPU is about as fast as dual-core Intel Core i3. But AMD cores have much slower single threaded performance, while really sucking at energy efficiency. But for some reason, this logic does not seem to apply to the mobile world, with many consumers thinking that more cores is better. So the market is now filled with cheap and mid-range android devices that have way too many cores, yet single-threaded performance somewhere on the level of the original iPhone 5.
I agree. In my household, all android phones are still based on the 2-3 year old Snapdragon 800/801 SoCs. This SoC is fast enough (the same used in LG G2, LG G3, Samsung Galaxy S5, Oneplus One, etc). And now I am thinking of picking up a Nexus 6 if the price drops below 300. The issues that concern me more right now are the battery life, audio quality, build quality, camera performance, the LTE performance, etc.
As for iOS, I could live with it, but personally I prefer the Android way. iOS is too limiting in many ways because apple wants to be there only THE WAY to accomplish any task. My gripe with them right now is that can't get any mp3s or other media on the phone without going through the bloated and buggy itunes desktop app.
Compatibility with all future versions of Android should not be a priority for consumers IMO. I have devices that probably will be stuck on 5.0.x forever, and I don't see a huge problem with that. The GUIs have matures, and I will still enjoy years of good application support. In fact, Kitkat should be also good enough for most people.
On the other hand, I don't necessarily agree with apple's policy of always updating the OS, even on a four years old device to the latest version. Case in point is the iPhone 4S that has become nearly useless with the iOS 8/9 update. This some anecdotal evidence, including videos, showing that 4S running iOS 8/9 has become slower than the iPhone 4 running 7 (the latest supported on iphone 4).
I am not even sure if your comment is on topic, but I recall that RBAC is basically Sun's answer to sudo. As usual, instead of adopting in a well known, well liked, and well understood open source program into Solaris 8, Sun came up with its own "RBAC", which only works on Solaris and barely anyone used it.
Your comment reminds me the old Soviet joke about a director of a kolkhoz, who during an important meeting announced: "I have two news for you, one good and the other bad. The bad news is that we lost all crops and we will have to eat shit all of the next year. The good news is that we have plenty of shit!"
who never used any of those two features, so I guess it won't affect me. But I do feel happy that Mozilla is working on making Firefox run faster. I use it on four different OSes, and it would be appreciated if they made it tidier and faster.
The Hobbit movies did pick up the pace after the first one. My favorite was the second part. Speaking of slow beginnings, the first LOTR was also awfully slow.
I was a college Solaris administrator from 1999 to 2007, and we stopped buying new Sun machines (mostly desktops, and some low end servers) at around year 2000, which can give you an idea how non-competitive they were in terms of hardware price-performance. And around that time, Intel Xeon was already slaughtering SPARC in CPU benchmarks like spec int/fp. Some have speculated that Sun's brand new UltraSparc III was briefly faster than intel around the year 2000 or so, but it took Sun like two years to start shipping those in significant numbers, and by then AMD/Intel left them in dust again.
Apple was always about FUD or making ridiculous marketing claims. I recall how in 1998, when they came up with the G3 PowerPC based computers, they were making the ridiculous claim that 233MHz G3 in an iMac was faster than 400MHz Pentium II, even though the claims were not based on some real world usage experience or benchmarks like spec int, but on some obscure Photoshop based benchmark if I recall that correctly. By the time Apple started using the G4 processors, claiming to be faster than Intel was not enough. Now they claimed that G4 is a supercomputer processor. Then couple of years later they announce the switch-over to Intel.. surprise surprise.
Granted, in the more recent times Apple hardware has usually been top notch, but companies will always have a need to spread marketing FUD against the competitor products..
Well, that shouldn't be an issue for 802.11ac or 802.11n. But like I mentioned in an other post, any AC router rated faster than AC1750 or AC1900 is overkill. You can make an argument that the two-stream AC1200 will suffice for 90% of households, since less than 5% or so of people have three stream capable wireless adapters.
It only would have MU-MIMO enabled devices, and they started hitting the market only this summer. So if you have three single stream AC clients and an AC17500/AC1900 three stream access point, then they all could talk it at once. However, there is still an issue with MU-MIMO, because MU-MIMO allows simultaneous clients only for uploads to the router. It won't help in situations one MU-MIMO client transferring files to another MU-MIMO client connected to the same radio on a AC.
The 1300Mbps is a scam figure because it's industry convention to report the layer 2 data transfer rate, but at that layer there is a lot of chatter dealing specifically with the physical link quality, which can be substantial with wireless. So indeed, in most cases you can take the number, then divide by two. That's the TCP/UDP data rate you will see in the best case scenario.
Moreover, 1300Mbps is the figure for the three-stream capable devices. But what's the percent of clients with three stream wireless adapters? About less than 5%?
Yes, but why should I pay for all that routing functionality when I will turn it off anyway?
You don't have any other alternatives, at least when we're talking about home-network class hardware. The market for plain ACs is so thin, that it's much easier and cheaper to actually buy a wireless router.
That's just a small area of economic research. A lot of studies work with publicly accessible data after it had been 'massaged' one way or another. That's because typical census/survey data sets come in multi-gigabyte mess of numbers, while a typical research question needs to operate on a small subset or a transformation of that subset. How the researcher gets from the raw survey data file down to the data set he is analyzing is not always clear. Also, the statistical codes, which are not always trivial.
Slashdot Mirror
I certainly don't consider my pebble watch junk. It delivers all the notifications, weather report, and tells time that's synced over the network. So at this point it already brings a little bit of something new to the table. I don't need to reach out for my phone whenever it beeps. The watch and its software are simplistic, but it costs just $130 for the steel version and runs a week on one charge..
I really like my Pebble Steel watch, but I agree that what we're going to see eventually is Pebble going the way of Palm Pilot simply because of the massively bigger ecosystem of software and developers that Apple and Google's Android have.
Well, I don't believe most people apply this type of standard. More than a week of run time is plenty for most people. We charge our smartphones and many other devices every day, but you can't connect a watch to a charger at the same time?
Anyways, the smartwatch does provide pretty decent utility. Yes, the phone does everything you need, but you need to reach out for it into your pocket. Instead of pulling the smartphone every time it beeps, you can glance first at the smartwatch to see what's up. Once you see the first few lines of the message, email, or other notice, you can then decide if you need to get the smartphone or not.
When it comes to battery life, NOTHING on the market can beat Pebble's first generation Pebble Watch and Pebble Watch Steel. Both of them are actually pretty light, and the Steel is sort of a watch you can wear to a dinner. Both can go a week on a full charge. Even Pebble's own second generation Time and Time Steel run time took a hit when they introduced the color screen.
While I love my Pebble Steel, I do fear Pebble will eventually go down the way of Palm Inc, Walkman, Blueberry and others.
You'd be really surprised how good the first Pebble Watch and it's Steel version are. Specially, Pebble Steel looks good, you don't need to tatoo "I am a nerd" on your forehead, it has always-on screen that's readable in all conditions and goes for over a week without a change. At $130 a pop, the Steel actually looks better than conventional watches for the same price, syncs time over the network, and delivers notifications from your phone. Very good utility IMO.
The second generation Pebbles added color screen, but at the expense of battery. I do agree that Pebble will probably go the way of Palm Inc eventually, or at very best it will remain a sort of geek-oriented underground smartwatch brand.
I have LG phones, but considering all the pain you need to go through to use CM13, I don't know why not just stick with a stock-based ROM. The LG G3 supposedly will get the official MM update soon. My preference is actually just use a stripped down OEM ROM.
PS: in some ways the above also explains why people shy away from AMD CPUs. Nice multithreaded benchmark will show that a quad-core AMD CPU is about as fast as dual-core Intel Core i3. But AMD cores have much slower single threaded performance, while really sucking at energy efficiency. But for some reason, this logic does not seem to apply to the mobile world, with many consumers thinking that more cores is better. So the market is now filled with cheap and mid-range android devices that have way too many cores, yet single-threaded performance somewhere on the level of the original iPhone 5.
I agree. In my household, all android phones are still based on the 2-3 year old Snapdragon 800/801 SoCs. This SoC is fast enough (the same used in LG G2, LG G3, Samsung Galaxy S5, Oneplus One, etc). And now I am thinking of picking up a Nexus 6 if the price drops below 300. The issues that concern me more right now are the battery life, audio quality, build quality, camera performance, the LTE performance, etc.
As for iOS, I could live with it, but personally I prefer the Android way. iOS is too limiting in many ways because apple wants to be there only THE WAY to accomplish any task. My gripe with them right now is that can't get any mp3s or other media on the phone without going through the bloated and buggy itunes desktop app.
Compatibility with all future versions of Android should not be a priority for consumers IMO. I have devices that probably will be stuck on 5.0.x forever, and I don't see a huge problem with that. The GUIs have matures, and I will still enjoy years of good application support. In fact, Kitkat should be also good enough for most people.
On the other hand, I don't necessarily agree with apple's policy of always updating the OS, even on a four years old device to the latest version. Case in point is the iPhone 4S that has become nearly useless with the iOS 8/9 update. This some anecdotal evidence, including videos, showing that 4S running iOS 8/9 has become slower than the iPhone 4 running 7 (the latest supported on iphone 4).
I am not even sure if your comment is on topic, but I recall that RBAC is basically Sun's answer to sudo. As usual, instead of adopting in a well known, well liked, and well understood open source program into Solaris 8, Sun came up with its own "RBAC", which only works on Solaris and barely anyone used it.
Your comment reminds me the old Soviet joke about a director of a kolkhoz, who during an important meeting announced: "I have two news for you, one good and the other bad. The bad news is that we lost all crops and we will have to eat shit all of the next year. The good news is that we have plenty of shit!"
who never used any of those two features, so I guess it won't affect me. But I do feel happy that Mozilla is working on making Firefox run faster. I use it on four different OSes, and it would be appreciated if they made it tidier and faster.
The Hobbit movies did pick up the pace after the first one. My favorite was the second part. Speaking of slow beginnings, the first LOTR was also awfully slow.
Some companies are bundling products and services!
Shocking!
News at 11.
I was a college Solaris administrator from 1999 to 2007, and we stopped buying new Sun machines (mostly desktops, and some low end servers) at around year 2000, which can give you an idea how non-competitive they were in terms of hardware price-performance. And around that time, Intel Xeon was already slaughtering SPARC in CPU benchmarks like spec int/fp. Some have speculated that Sun's brand new UltraSparc III was briefly faster than intel around the year 2000 or so, but it took Sun like two years to start shipping those in significant numbers, and by then AMD/Intel left them in dust again.
Apple was always about FUD or making ridiculous marketing claims. I recall how in 1998, when they came up with the G3 PowerPC based computers, they were making the ridiculous claim that 233MHz G3 in an iMac was faster than 400MHz Pentium II, even though the claims were not based on some real world usage experience or benchmarks like spec int, but on some obscure Photoshop based benchmark if I recall that correctly. By the time Apple started using the G4 processors, claiming to be faster than Intel was not enough. Now they claimed that G4 is a supercomputer processor. Then couple of years later they announce the switch-over to Intel.. surprise surprise.
Granted, in the more recent times Apple hardware has usually been top notch, but companies will always have a need to spread marketing FUD against the competitor products..
Well, that shouldn't be an issue for 802.11ac or 802.11n. But like I mentioned in an other post, any AC router rated faster than AC1750 or AC1900 is overkill. You can make an argument that the two-stream AC1200 will suffice for 90% of households, since less than 5% or so of people have three stream capable wireless adapters.
It only would have MU-MIMO enabled devices, and they started hitting the market only this summer. So if you have three single stream AC clients and an AC17500/AC1900 three stream access point, then they all could talk it at once. However, there is still an issue with MU-MIMO, because MU-MIMO allows simultaneous clients only for uploads to the router. It won't help in situations one MU-MIMO client transferring files to another MU-MIMO client connected to the same radio on a AC.
The 1300Mbps is a scam figure because it's industry convention to report the layer 2 data transfer rate, but at that layer there is a lot of chatter dealing specifically with the physical link quality, which can be substantial with wireless. So indeed, in most cases you can take the number, then divide by two. That's the TCP/UDP data rate you will see in the best case scenario.
Moreover, 1300Mbps is the figure for the three-stream capable devices. But what's the percent of clients with three stream wireless adapters? About less than 5%?
Yes, but why should I pay for all that routing functionality when I will turn it off anyway?
You don't have any other alternatives, at least when we're talking about home-network class hardware. The market for plain ACs is so thin, that it's much easier and cheaper to actually buy a wireless router.
It is trivial to turn off the routing functionality, effectively configuring the router into AP.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com...
Sounds like your knowledge of economics hasn't gone beyond that of reciting of stereotypical jokes.
If you think that economics is the science of predicting the future, you're mistaken. It's only very small part of it.
That's just a small area of economic research. A lot of studies work with publicly accessible data after it had been 'massaged' one way or another. That's because typical census/survey data sets come in multi-gigabyte mess of numbers, while a typical research question needs to operate on a small subset or a transformation of that subset. How the researcher gets from the raw survey data file down to the data set he is analyzing is not always clear. Also, the statistical codes, which are not always trivial.
How many people believe in answering a troll question that doesn't make any sense? Give a reference for your straw man argument please.