In a work place I've rarely seen laptops remain useable after 3 years. Often the DVD drive is dead, the screen blurry, the battery life is significantly less and the keyboards starts becoming sticky (I know...). At the price the damn things are we usually just replace them and get another 3 years out of them.
Desktops on the other had appear to get about 6-8 years. The lucky guys are the one working in engineering since whenever the complaining starts, the computers get replaced and then theirs get passed down.
Although true, I think the increase in civil rights does play a big role in this. Without rights to fight, lawsuits wouldn't be a common occurrence.
Sometimes I find the fighting pointless and often the parties fighting are ignorant but in other cases it's the exact opposite. I think our justice system is still very immature and it will eventually evolve to better serve both sides (society as a whole and people as individuals).
Call me naïve if you want but I have faith in human kind and our ability to redirect our efforts towards bettering our society.
I don't think the range is an issue but people always consider the fact that they need to travel beyond the range at times. I don't know too many people that don't at least travel 600km once or twice in a year. I personally do 800km 4-10 times a year.
Even if 95% of the time the car would satisfy their needs, many would consider the limited range a show stopper especially at that price point.. Considering most people keep a car 5-8 years, most will say maybe my next car can be an EV. I know that personally I'm considering buying another 4 stroke engine because the EVs are still pricy for what I consider a compact car. I figure in 5-8 years I'll change car again anyway.
Here's why I think your prediction is too ambitious: - EVs are currently priced like luxury cars with the feature equivalent to a Corolla. Currently the Chevy Cruise sells for $21 000 less than the Volt. That's about 11 years worth of gasoline at $1.30 / L - Dealerships don't care about EVs, what they care about is vehicles that move quickly off the lot. This means people have to demand EVs. - Many car buyers are still not convinced to buy EVs. Not enough of them out there to prove to them their hard earn money should be put at risk. This is especially true of the older generations who will purchase what they know (Not just true of cars). Surprisingly I know a 55 year old who just bolt a Volt but he is fascinated by them since he's worked with electric motors his whole life. The people I know who purchased EVs or Hybrids are all from my generation or earlier. - It's been over 16 years since the first Hybrid was made available in NA and hybrids and EVs still haven't broken the 5% mark of market share (cars only, not SUVs or Pickups) - Gasoline has come back to a lower price which provides less incentive. Fact is that the prices will probably hover at this market value for a little while since the increase market value was caused by growing economies that have now stabilized.
IMHO what will make EVs break the market rapidly is fast charging stations. This will allows all consumers to trust they can obtain the same experience with an EV as they do with a 4 stroke engine.
No, it is that he doesn't understand Turbo Boost. That feature is to allow for the processor to run higher than normal for short periods of time, not 24/7.
Which it doesn't even do at the moment (according to the writer).
It's interesting that you would mention the Prius as that's the one I'm the most aware of. I don't own one myself but both owners I know had to replace the very expensive battery after approximately 7 years. Add to this the cost of expensive repairs that occurred due to electrical issues with the car and you are looking at a loss. The average car owner spends $2000 / year on gasoline. If you consider the fact that at the time the cost to replace the battery was close to $6000 (labor included), $6000 / 7 = $857 / year. The cost of replacing pads and rotors is much higher due to more extensive labor. In addition, both owners had to replace the generators (not sure what the name is) in the wheels. That brake job cost them over $2500. Tag to that other electrical issues they BOTH encountered and add the extra cost of the vehicle (Even after massive federal grants) and your cost to operate is higher than one of a 4 cylinder Camry.
Nobody (not even Toyota) denied the more elevated cost of maintenance and repair for said vehicles. Anytime you step away from the mold there's additional money to be spent. This is also why at the time MotorTrend was recommending leasing of said vehicles instead of opting for ownership.
Progress is great but the first ones onboard usually get screwed. This is why I admire the Tesla model since it puts a much higher price tag and it remains very involved with the owners for an extensive period of time.
Tesla has the correct model by catering to the wealthier. It leaves extra cash for dealing with design issues and recalling vehicles when required.
Those who purchased a Hybrid when they first came out did so to save money but in most cases they didn't. The cost of keeping the vehicle on the road past the 6 year mark outweigh the cost of gasoline in most cases. The reason is that the cost of ownership is higher than a regular car because as you know, there are a million car shops that can fix technology from the 80's and parts are readily available at low cost.
The progress on EV in the last 5 years is impressive and I think it will take another 10-20 before we see a huge switch to electric.
It's funny how people are willing to trade hundreds of evil companies (Bell, Verizon, AT&T, MS, Apple...) for one greater evil (Google). For those who do not understand what is happening, Google owns the future of marketing. The places to advertise your product effectively are becoming more and more scarce. TV providers can see their market shrink year after year and this is partially due to PVRs and the availability of content via stream. This is also why sports distribution has become a hot commodity with the NHL contract for Canada going to Rogers for 5.2 billion (12 year contract). Nobody PVRs a hockey or football game but an episode of walking dead or game of throne is fine for watching later.
Google looks good because they give everything for free in exchange for your time (advertising). Anybody that can milk that model is bound to eradicate the competition. After all, who can compete with free. As of today Google owns 88% of the worlds searches with Bing right behind at 4.5%;)
Don't take me wrong, I love Google's products but I fear them as much as I love them.
It still doesn't make sense. The intent of higher specs is for them to be beneficial. What's the point of a higher spec if it makes no difference? May as well put the same spec and avoid the need for 2 skus. If what the writer says is correct there is a definite problem with the board at the software level. Is it so hard to believe a company could have made a mistake? I've seen much worst while I worked for a world renown network product manufacturer). You would not believe what product managers approve under sales and marketing pressure. I've seen iSCSI products released that were know to corrupted data if set in Raid 5.
I have a family member that works high up at the biggest electricity provider in Canada and he told me when I had the same argument with him that there is no plan to automate this. It will remain hard buttons for a long time.
It's 3 watts which makes it $4. Even at 10 it's still a 5 year ROI not including the overhead of the system. A whole system would take longer than your mortgage to pay for. So unless you are doing it for luxury there is no point. A few months ago I was arguing the same with a fellow/. user and he pointed me to a link that showed how automation serves very little in the way of saving power.
SCADA was rarely required to run outside the building. Most SCADA systems I've seen are isolated just because there's no need for them to be given access to anything else than the content it will run. For this reason SCADA systems have not been exposed and their team most probably lacks the security experience. MS, Apple and Linux all suffered when they first got hooked up to the internet. Today these company have tones of experience and react fairly quickly to security holes.
As for power plants, most of them (if not all) are still operated manually using hard buttons. The only connection there is to the plant is connection to the monitoring of sensors.
It cost $4.00 per year to keep a LED bulb (60 watts equivalent) on 100% of the time at 15 cents per KW/h. It would take over 10 years to pay for a switch to cover the cost. Add to this the cost of running the system as a whole and you are heavily into negative savings.
Most of the cost of having kids live with you comes from: - laundry - electronics - curling irons and hair driers - long showers - cooking for more people
You can't reduce the laundry cost unless you get better equipment or manage laundry loads better You can already optimize electronics power consumption by using the built in energy saving methods You can try to educate the kids to control the length of their showers Cooking has to continue so that cost will remain the same.
More people in a house hold equals more electricity and water usage. You can't avoid that.
In my opinion automation systems are really good for the following: - T-Stat control (such as the Nexus) can reduce your heating/cooling bill significantly - Oven outlet (in case you forget it on). This is both a cost saving and possibly a life saving since a large percentage of household fires are caused by ovens left on
Anything else I can think is more of a luxury such as auto ambience control, blinds...
The point here is the non mobile version is throttled at 80 C. Why is the mobile version that is supposed to be capable of more processing throttled at 90 C as well?
I'm going based on the information provided in the article. I didn't actually dig into the capabilities of the said processors.
Yes but his comments specify how the GHz are dropped through throttling which occurs when temperatures are reached.
I believe he should contact the manufacturer and have them evaluate the BIOS. If the specs say the processor can run up to 125 C then it should only start getting throttled at about ~115 C. I suspect the fan running full speed will keep it under the threshold.
Because we don't know enough about what they are developing we can't even offer alternative solutions. Maybe cloud processing is a good alternative for high powered laptops... not enough information to evaluate.
I'm not sure I understand your statement or it's purpose. Are you saying the journalist are cowards? If so I disagree. They are instead considering the fact that their staff (with no decision on content) may not want to risk their lives over this.
I think the staff should get to speak up and if they all agree then so be it. We can't have freedom of speech taken away by a few extremists.
I appreciate your opinion even if I don't completely agree.
There are plenty of salesman that promise such things, however, who is going to have the access to set it up and then how are any of these things going to stop someone with physical access to the equipment?
This is where you get to thin the herd. Instead of 15 people with access you may only have 2. In addition some of these solutions are managed by 3rd parties which means the local admins have no access at all to the remote logs (A perfect system as far as I'm concerned). All the local admins can do is disable the service but that will only trigger a phone call to get it back on and possibly an investigation by the higher up.
Fact is that no ones job should go unmonitored especially when it comes to security. I have a friend who works in a gold processing plant and every single time they leave the building they are stripped of their lab close and searched. If gold processing labs warrants this it's because people when given an opportunity may take it. This is just as true for IT admins with access to sensitive data.
Actually, don't take their word, take the submitter of the article posted a few months ago on/. I searched but there are so many topic including Tesla. It was an article talking about the rapid charging stations (30 minute charge time if I recall) and in that same article there was a statement from someone (not sure who) that Tesla would rather focus it's effort on charging stations due to the complexity in create an exchange network.
I also just spoke to my co-worker and he said that this information came directly from the dealers (months ago). He also mentioned that as a customer they get lots of inside information about the car and the car company's plans (information I'm sure is available to all). Being that Tesla owners tend to be enthusiast, I would take their word over a commenter on/. that doesn't own a Tesla.
According to my co-worker, the reason why charging stations are probably going to pop up before swap stations (where I live), is that the space requirements for batteries is hard to accommodate for many gas stations. In addition there needs to be a distribution system which handles the delivery and recovery of batteries. The other option is to have the gas stations themselves recharge the batteries but this isn't ideal for a few reasons: 1. The gas station will have to invest into chargers which will be obsolete before they are paid for 2. Extra staff required which means you either need volume or you need to charge the customer for the extra cost of storage, charging and labor. The $5.00 charge is now starting to look like $40 / charge. 3. You are relying on a minimum wage employee to take care of very expensive batteries 4. You are asking the gas station to get certified to carry large quantities of these batteries which in those quantities is considered to be a hazard
Slashdot Mirror
In a work place I've rarely seen laptops remain useable after 3 years. Often the DVD drive is dead, the screen blurry, the battery life is significantly less and the keyboards starts becoming sticky (I know...). At the price the damn things are we usually just replace them and get another 3 years out of them.
Desktops on the other had appear to get about 6-8 years. The lucky guys are the one working in engineering since whenever the complaining starts, the computers get replaced and then theirs get passed down.
Although true, I think the increase in civil rights does play a big role in this. Without rights to fight, lawsuits wouldn't be a common occurrence.
Sometimes I find the fighting pointless and often the parties fighting are ignorant but in other cases it's the exact opposite. I think our justice system is still very immature and it will eventually evolve to better serve both sides (society as a whole and people as individuals).
Call me naïve if you want but I have faith in human kind and our ability to redirect our efforts towards bettering our society.
I don't think the range is an issue but people always consider the fact that they need to travel beyond the range at times. I don't know too many people that don't at least travel 600km once or twice in a year. I personally do 800km 4-10 times a year.
Even if 95% of the time the car would satisfy their needs, many would consider the limited range a show stopper especially at that price point.. Considering most people keep a car 5-8 years, most will say maybe my next car can be an EV. I know that personally I'm considering buying another 4 stroke engine because the EVs are still pricy for what I consider a compact car. I figure in 5-8 years I'll change car again anyway.
Here's why I think your prediction is too ambitious:
- EVs are currently priced like luxury cars with the feature equivalent to a Corolla. Currently the Chevy Cruise sells for $21 000 less than the Volt. That's about 11 years worth of gasoline at $1.30 / L
- Dealerships don't care about EVs, what they care about is vehicles that move quickly off the lot. This means people have to demand EVs.
- Many car buyers are still not convinced to buy EVs. Not enough of them out there to prove to them their hard earn money should be put at risk. This is especially true of the older generations who will purchase what they know (Not just true of cars). Surprisingly I know a 55 year old who just bolt a Volt but he is fascinated by them since he's worked with electric motors his whole life. The people I know who purchased EVs or Hybrids are all from my generation or earlier.
- It's been over 16 years since the first Hybrid was made available in NA and hybrids and EVs still haven't broken the 5% mark of market share (cars only, not SUVs or Pickups)
- Gasoline has come back to a lower price which provides less incentive. Fact is that the prices will probably hover at this market value for a little while since the increase market value was caused by growing economies that have now stabilized.
IMHO what will make EVs break the market rapidly is fast charging stations. This will allows all consumers to trust they can obtain the same experience with an EV as they do with a 4 stroke engine.
No, it is that he doesn't understand Turbo Boost. That feature is to allow for the processor to run higher than normal for short periods of time, not 24/7.
Which it doesn't even do at the moment (according to the writer).
It's interesting that you would mention the Prius as that's the one I'm the most aware of. I don't own one myself but both owners I know had to replace the very expensive battery after approximately 7 years. Add to this the cost of expensive repairs that occurred due to electrical issues with the car and you are looking at a loss. The average car owner spends $2000 / year on gasoline. If you consider the fact that at the time the cost to replace the battery was close to $6000 (labor included), $6000 / 7 = $857 / year. The cost of replacing pads and rotors is much higher due to more extensive labor. In addition, both owners had to replace the generators (not sure what the name is) in the wheels. That brake job cost them over $2500. Tag to that other electrical issues they BOTH encountered and add the extra cost of the vehicle (Even after massive federal grants) and your cost to operate is higher than one of a 4 cylinder Camry.
Nobody (not even Toyota) denied the more elevated cost of maintenance and repair for said vehicles. Anytime you step away from the mold there's additional money to be spent. This is also why at the time MotorTrend was recommending leasing of said vehicles instead of opting for ownership.
Progress is great but the first ones onboard usually get screwed. This is why I admire the Tesla model since it puts a much higher price tag and it remains very involved with the owners for an extensive period of time.
Tesla has the correct model by catering to the wealthier. It leaves extra cash for dealing with design issues and recalling vehicles when required.
Those who purchased a Hybrid when they first came out did so to save money but in most cases they didn't. The cost of keeping the vehicle on the road past the 6 year mark outweigh the cost of gasoline in most cases. The reason is that the cost of ownership is higher than a regular car because as you know, there are a million car shops that can fix technology from the 80's and parts are readily available at low cost.
The progress on EV in the last 5 years is impressive and I think it will take another 10-20 before we see a huge switch to electric.
They both are true electric cars. The different is that one has a gas operated charging stations onboard.
My bad, 8 watt is correct. 3 watts was a 25 watt equivalent.
It's funny how people are willing to trade hundreds of evil companies (Bell, Verizon, AT&T, MS, Apple...) for one greater evil (Google). For those who do not understand what is happening, Google owns the future of marketing. The places to advertise your product effectively are becoming more and more scarce. TV providers can see their market shrink year after year and this is partially due to PVRs and the availability of content via stream. This is also why sports distribution has become a hot commodity with the NHL contract for Canada going to Rogers for 5.2 billion (12 year contract). Nobody PVRs a hockey or football game but an episode of walking dead or game of throne is fine for watching later.
Google looks good because they give everything for free in exchange for your time (advertising). Anybody that can milk that model is bound to eradicate the competition. After all, who can compete with free. As of today Google owns 88% of the worlds searches with Bing right behind at 4.5% ;)
Don't take me wrong, I love Google's products but I fear them as much as I love them.
It still doesn't make sense. The intent of higher specs is for them to be beneficial. What's the point of a higher spec if it makes no difference? May as well put the same spec and avoid the need for 2 skus. If what the writer says is correct there is a definite problem with the board at the software level. Is it so hard to believe a company could have made a mistake? I've seen much worst while I worked for a world renown network product manufacturer). You would not believe what product managers approve under sales and marketing pressure. I've seen iSCSI products released that were know to corrupted data if set in Raid 5.
I have a family member that works high up at the biggest electricity provider in Canada and he told me when I had the same argument with him that there is no plan to automate this. It will remain hard buttons for a long time.
It's 3 watts which makes it $4. Even at 10 it's still a 5 year ROI not including the overhead of the system. A whole system would take longer than your mortgage to pay for. So unless you are doing it for luxury there is no point. A few months ago I was arguing the same with a fellow /. user and he pointed me to a link that showed how automation serves very little in the way of saving power.
SCADA was rarely required to run outside the building. Most SCADA systems I've seen are isolated just because there's no need for them to be given access to anything else than the content it will run. For this reason SCADA systems have not been exposed and their team most probably lacks the security experience. MS, Apple and Linux all suffered when they first got hooked up to the internet. Today these company have tones of experience and react fairly quickly to security holes.
As for power plants, most of them (if not all) are still operated manually using hard buttons. The only connection there is to the plant is connection to the monitoring of sensors.
It cost $4.00 per year to keep a LED bulb (60 watts equivalent) on 100% of the time at 15 cents per KW/h. It would take over 10 years to pay for a switch to cover the cost. Add to this the cost of running the system as a whole and you are heavily into negative savings.
Most of the cost of having kids live with you comes from:
- laundry
- electronics
- curling irons and hair driers
- long showers
- cooking for more people
You can't reduce the laundry cost unless you get better equipment or manage laundry loads better
You can already optimize electronics power consumption by using the built in energy saving methods
You can try to educate the kids to control the length of their showers
Cooking has to continue so that cost will remain the same.
More people in a house hold equals more electricity and water usage. You can't avoid that.
In my opinion automation systems are really good for the following:
- T-Stat control (such as the Nexus) can reduce your heating/cooling bill significantly
- Oven outlet (in case you forget it on). This is both a cost saving and possibly a life saving since a large percentage of household fires are caused by ovens left on
Anything else I can think is more of a luxury such as auto ambience control, blinds...
My 2 cents.
The point here is the non mobile version is throttled at 80 C. Why is the mobile version that is supposed to be capable of more processing throttled at 90 C as well?
I'm going based on the information provided in the article. I didn't actually dig into the capabilities of the said processors.
Many have actually published these cartoons since the event. Proof that they didn't win.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/c...
The definition is not complete. Here is the formal definition. Not sure why Princeton.edu doesn't have it right.
Coward is not just fear, it's shameful. It's like saying "bad" and "worst" are the same.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
http://www.thefreedictionary.c...
Yes but his comments specify how the GHz are dropped through throttling which occurs when temperatures are reached.
I believe he should contact the manufacturer and have them evaluate the BIOS. If the specs say the processor can run up to 125 C then it should only start getting throttled at about ~115 C. I suspect the fan running full speed will keep it under the threshold.
Because we don't know enough about what they are developing we can't even offer alternative solutions. Maybe cloud processing is a good alternative for high powered laptops... not enough information to evaluate.
I'm not sure I understand your statement or it's purpose. Are you saying the journalist are cowards? If so I disagree. They are instead considering the fact that their staff (with no decision on content) may not want to risk their lives over this.
I think the staff should get to speak up and if they all agree then so be it. We can't have freedom of speech taken away by a few extremists.
This is an excellent TED Talk about this very topic.
http://www.ted.com/talks/hans_...
I appreciate your opinion even if I don't completely agree.
There are plenty of salesman that promise such things, however, who is going to have the access to set it up and then how are any of these things going to stop someone with physical access to the equipment?
This is where you get to thin the herd. Instead of 15 people with access you may only have 2. In addition some of these solutions are managed by 3rd parties which means the local admins have no access at all to the remote logs (A perfect system as far as I'm concerned). All the local admins can do is disable the service but that will only trigger a phone call to get it back on and possibly an investigation by the higher up.
Fact is that no ones job should go unmonitored especially when it comes to security. I have a friend who works in a gold processing plant and every single time they leave the building they are stripped of their lab close and searched. If gold processing labs warrants this it's because people when given an opportunity may take it. This is just as true for IT admins with access to sensitive data.
That made me giggle!!
Regardless you knew it was possible so why did you argue?
Actually, don't take their word, take the submitter of the article posted a few months ago on /. I searched but there are so many topic including Tesla. It was an article talking about the rapid charging stations (30 minute charge time if I recall) and in that same article there was a statement from someone (not sure who) that Tesla would rather focus it's effort on charging stations due to the complexity in create an exchange network.
I also just spoke to my co-worker and he said that this information came directly from the dealers (months ago). He also mentioned that as a customer they get lots of inside information about the car and the car company's plans (information I'm sure is available to all). Being that Tesla owners tend to be enthusiast, I would take their word over a commenter on /. that doesn't own a Tesla.
According to my co-worker, the reason why charging stations are probably going to pop up before swap stations (where I live), is that the space requirements for batteries is hard to accommodate for many gas stations. In addition there needs to be a distribution system which handles the delivery and recovery of batteries. The other option is to have the gas stations themselves recharge the batteries but this isn't ideal for a few reasons:
1. The gas station will have to invest into chargers which will be obsolete before they are paid for
2. Extra staff required which means you either need volume or you need to charge the customer for the extra cost of storage, charging and labor. The $5.00 charge is now starting to look like $40 / charge.
3. You are relying on a minimum wage employee to take care of very expensive batteries
4. You are asking the gas station to get certified to carry large quantities of these batteries which in those quantities is considered to be a hazard