Am I the only person who has known this for years? No matter how much data goes through infrastructure, it's not going to change the cost of running the infrastructure (significantly). That's like keeping a huge lightbulb on in town square but making people pay for the priveledge of removing the curtains from their house to let the light in. Doesn't change the cost, just another way for ISPs to gouge consumers.
However, there is an exception. Satellite internet it makes sense right now for their to be caps. It's a behavior adjuster. A single satellite can only transfer so much data at once, so they commonly have off-peak times where if you want to download a few gigs, you can do it in those times and it won't go towards your cap. This is required because satellites are a fairly precious resource. Where I use to live no one in a 50 mile radius could get satellite internet because the only satellite serving the region was already over utilized and they didn't want it to get even worse.
I can't wait until we finally get at that intersection point of SSD and HDD pricing. Why? Because when that happens the harddrive manufacturers hopefully will either die and reduce down to niche markets, or they will finally wake up and realize they can't keep their prices artificially inflated.
I've never had an SSD, and had a very bad experience with a first gen one. However, I need to build another computer in the near future and I've been thinking long and hard about SSD versus HDD. Still undecided, but with trends like this, I'll be opting for SSD
I really hope that this ends up passing, but I don't see the big operators letting it get through with their lobbying ability. I mean, say a small rural town. AT&T won't build infrastructure for 4G and neither will any of the other big carriers. The current option is for a regional carrier to make a deal to get part of say AT&T's spectrum so they can put up their own 4G towers.. If AT&T doesn't like that, they don't allow it. I think AT&T shouldn't have a say in spectrum for an area that is completely unused. This should be managed at the FCC so that it's at least decently fair...
But, then you also have the whole "what if AT&T wants to build out into the area and displace the regional service"... The answer there is that AT&T should lease their towers and spectrum. Make it so a block of spectrum is never controlled by a single monopolistic company, or at least make it so it's not economical to.
This is on par with having a tiny link at the bottom of your page "opt out of you selling all the information I provide here". No one is going to see it. I remember receiving the email, but that was just yesterday or the day before. And the email didn't really include anything about voting in the subject line, so I just assume it was another privacy policy update.
If they cared at all about people voting, they would've had a longer time frame than 2 days, and they would've used Facebook, not email to get the word out that you can vote on it. Most people I know don't even remember the password, much less check, the email account associated with facebook.
It seems like everyone always wants a single measurement to judge how good something is. Graphics cards have FPS, CPUs have GHz, ISPs have MB/s. What's not shown in these single number measurements are things like lag, or overheating problems, or random spikes of instability.
Sigh. Maybe one day we'll learn that every product needs more than a single number to judge how good it is performance-wise.
If some driver developers would make a middle-man between the GPU and the OS so that it saw this one monitor as two smaller monitors, this might be useful.
The worst thing about dual monitor is the bezel between them and transitioning from one to another can be a pain sometimes because the edge is hard to see.
That being said though, I don't think this would work in that case either. You tend to focus on the center of the screen, which wouldn't work for a virtual dual monitor setup. What we really need a simple dual screen display designed exclusively as an "integrated" dual monitor setup, complete with a near invisible bezel between the screens and a small hinge or something so you can have the screens at different angles. A flat setup won't work because you tend to look into the middle of the screen and it's difficult to setup to be good on a desk. However, if you could have say a 45 degree angle between the two screens, it'd be perfect.
What exaclty were you expecting? If you want your server to be all setup for you, you'll buy a managed server, and pay a hefty price-premium for them holding your hand the whole time. If you want to save money, then you'll read some man pages and tutorials and figure out how to set it up on your own. Also, if you think you "need" a GUI on your server, then you obviously aren't all that well experienced with server management.
If you really can't do any of this on your own, hire a sysadmin. Any sysadmin worth their weight in salt know how to use a linux command line to setup something as easy as PHP and Apache. Hell, most VPS services these days provide template VPSs with these services already setup
What's mentioned in TFA, but not TFS is the news they include that they will be moving away from subsidies. This I think is an awesome improvement! Think about it, "I can pay $30 less per month, put that into a savings account and every 2 years get a good phone... or I can get a good phone now and pay an extra $50 per month for a worse plan and if I mess up it ruins my credit" They mention changing subsidies to a "payment plan" type of thing, which is really what it should be considered. I completely welcome this change.
As a result, they provide their phones with minimal margins because they'll make it up in monthly fees(for the service). I bought my wife a phone with T-Mobile and I was amazed I could get a relatively decent Android phone for $200. Try finding a decent smart phone from another carrier at that price. Also, her plan is flat $50/month with no contract, and unlimited everything. Last time I looked at AT&T, the equivalent plan was $110/month and a similar low-mid-range phone was $450 without a contract
Well, I didn't see this coming, but now that it's happened I'll be looking at possible replacements. I love the gmail interface, and it's the only thing I'm interested in (don't care about docs, etc). I imagine there will be some competitors come and break Google's stronghold on web email now though, particularly in managing your own domain for free
Slashdot Mirror
The more I learn about the past of computing the more I'm convinced they only ever considered one failure mode: catastrophic.
Better question: Why doesn't it have a touch screen? A computer isn't "modern" without a touch screen
See also: list of books not allowed in school/public libraries
Am I the only person who has known this for years? No matter how much data goes through infrastructure, it's not going to change the cost of running the infrastructure (significantly). That's like keeping a huge lightbulb on in town square but making people pay for the priveledge of removing the curtains from their house to let the light in. Doesn't change the cost, just another way for ISPs to gouge consumers. However, there is an exception. Satellite internet it makes sense right now for their to be caps. It's a behavior adjuster. A single satellite can only transfer so much data at once, so they commonly have off-peak times where if you want to download a few gigs, you can do it in those times and it won't go towards your cap. This is required because satellites are a fairly precious resource. Where I use to live no one in a 50 mile radius could get satellite internet because the only satellite serving the region was already over utilized and they didn't want it to get even worse.
I can't wait until we finally get at that intersection point of SSD and HDD pricing. Why? Because when that happens the harddrive manufacturers hopefully will either die and reduce down to niche markets, or they will finally wake up and realize they can't keep their prices artificially inflated. I've never had an SSD, and had a very bad experience with a first gen one. However, I need to build another computer in the near future and I've been thinking long and hard about SSD versus HDD. Still undecided, but with trends like this, I'll be opting for SSD
But, then you also have the whole "what if AT&T wants to build out into the area and displace the regional service"... The answer there is that AT&T should lease their towers and spectrum. Make it so a block of spectrum is never controlled by a single monopolistic company, or at least make it so it's not economical to.
This is on par with having a tiny link at the bottom of your page "opt out of you selling all the information I provide here". No one is going to see it. I remember receiving the email, but that was just yesterday or the day before. And the email didn't really include anything about voting in the subject line, so I just assume it was another privacy policy update.
If they cared at all about people voting, they would've had a longer time frame than 2 days, and they would've used Facebook, not email to get the word out that you can vote on it. Most people I know don't even remember the password, much less check, the email account associated with facebook.
It seems like everyone always wants a single measurement to judge how good something is. Graphics cards have FPS, CPUs have GHz, ISPs have MB/s. What's not shown in these single number measurements are things like lag, or overheating problems, or random spikes of instability.
Sigh. Maybe one day we'll learn that every product needs more than a single number to judge how good it is performance-wise.
If some driver developers would make a middle-man between the GPU and the OS so that it saw this one monitor as two smaller monitors, this might be useful.
The worst thing about dual monitor is the bezel between them and transitioning from one to another can be a pain sometimes because the edge is hard to see.
That being said though, I don't think this would work in that case either. You tend to focus on the center of the screen, which wouldn't work for a virtual dual monitor setup. What we really need a simple dual screen display designed exclusively as an "integrated" dual monitor setup, complete with a near invisible bezel between the screens and a small hinge or something so you can have the screens at different angles. A flat setup won't work because you tend to look into the middle of the screen and it's difficult to setup to be good on a desk. However, if you could have say a 45 degree angle between the two screens, it'd be perfect.
What exaclty were you expecting? If you want your server to be all setup for you, you'll buy a managed server, and pay a hefty price-premium for them holding your hand the whole time. If you want to save money, then you'll read some man pages and tutorials and figure out how to set it up on your own. Also, if you think you "need" a GUI on your server, then you obviously aren't all that well experienced with server management. If you really can't do any of this on your own, hire a sysadmin. Any sysadmin worth their weight in salt know how to use a linux command line to setup something as easy as PHP and Apache. Hell, most VPS services these days provide template VPSs with these services already setup
What's mentioned in TFA, but not TFS is the news they include that they will be moving away from subsidies. This I think is an awesome improvement! Think about it, "I can pay $30 less per month, put that into a savings account and every 2 years get a good phone... or I can get a good phone now and pay an extra $50 per month for a worse plan and if I mess up it ruins my credit" They mention changing subsidies to a "payment plan" type of thing, which is really what it should be considered. I completely welcome this change.
As a result, they provide their phones with minimal margins because they'll make it up in monthly fees(for the service). I bought my wife a phone with T-Mobile and I was amazed I could get a relatively decent Android phone for $200. Try finding a decent smart phone from another carrier at that price. Also, her plan is flat $50/month with no contract, and unlimited everything. Last time I looked at AT&T, the equivalent plan was $110/month and a similar low-mid-range phone was $450 without a contract
Well, I didn't see this coming, but now that it's happened I'll be looking at possible replacements. I love the gmail interface, and it's the only thing I'm interested in (don't care about docs, etc). I imagine there will be some competitors come and break Google's stronghold on web email now though, particularly in managing your own domain for free