Luckily we're getting both. I just purchased a video card that's twice as powerful as my current one, and only uses 2/3 the power. I'm upgrading from a CPU using up to 130W to just 77W, but still gaining 20-25% performance.
Those are some good jumps in performance, but great leaps in efficiency. Total power consumption is a big factor moving forward in trying to reduce what we need from the grid.
In my opinion, the best option is just to buy two separate drives. Get a cheaper 120GB drive for your OS/programs, and continue to use hard drives for mass storage. There aren't huge performance differences when it comes to things like video, mp3s, or pictures. The place where you'll see the most benefit is OS loading speed, or how fast programs launch and games load.
I've used hybrid drives, and they are pretty good option for laptops, but you're really better off spending the extra money on a true solid state drive if it will be enough to contain your data.
You know, if they gave me an option of a $1 or $2 discount on my bill where they sold this information, I'd be totally ok with that. The thing is, they're just going to make more money and we'll never see a dime in savings for sacrificing our privacy.
For me it was high school. I started browsing Slashdot late 97 or early 98. Before I knew it, I was here daily.
I never posted much, but I always read comments. I still remember the first time I got mod points. I felt so important.;)
Slashdot is associated with a lot of memories for me. Not only has it been a huge source of my tech news, but also a topic of discussion amongst friends. "Did you see that article on Slashdot?" was something I probably heard every day. Good times.
Considering I saw this video a year ago, "nearing production" is a relative term. They do mention the article the same thing that's been holding these devices back, which is the lack of a non-tethered power source.
Until we get past that hurdle, I wouldn't say it's anywhere near production.
Either my sarcasm meter is malfunctioning, or you're actually serious.
Do you really expect government action in this matter? As much as you might think otherwise, your PSN account isn't a matter of national security. Not to mention that killing someone over theft is ludicrous.
Sony is responsible for keeping their servers secure.
Could you cite some examples of the poor security? I would rate Windows 7 in the fair or even good category of security. Homegroups now give home users the ability to lock down and encrypt their traffic over their network. Bitlocker provides disk encryption options. UAC can help end users from accidentally clicking on things they shouldn't. Most people find it annoying and disable it, but that's not Microsoft's fault. Built in firewalls have been getting better, and you won't find nearly as many exposed machines on the net because of the Home/Work/Public selection option when you connect to network.
Compared to other versions of Windows, 7 (and even Vista) are leaps beyond what they were before. Samba in Win9x was ridiculously insecure, but all of those holes have been plugged. It's not very often that I hear about a zero day exploit taking down networks like we had with the worms in the early 2000s. The words "MS Blaster" would strike fear into the hearts of any admin who had to deal with it. I haven't seen anything wreak havoc like it since.
Most network security issues, in my experience, are due to poor network administration rather than holes in the operating system itself. I can't help but feel that the parent comment is a somewhat empty statement.
There's no need to get a condescending tone about it. There is nothing "obvious" about it.
I have worked corporate IT, small business IT, and at one time ran my own business. There are many jobs where you are expected to have your own tools, but it varies from employer to employer. Most respectable companies supply their employees with everything they need. It's usually the mom n' pops or startup companies that force employees to buy their own stuff. The shop I bring my car to supplies tools for all of their mechanics. This makes it very easy to hire new techs, and makes sure that they have everything they need to do a job properly.
When people buy their own tools it can affect the quality of work being done. If you buy cheap tools, you will undoubtedly have more problems getting things done than someone with ones that have all the bells and whistles. With computers this is especially true.
Staying on the topic though, here's an example. Let's say Bob has a new laptop with the latest processor, 6 gigs of RAM, and a solid state drive, while Bill is working on a 4 year old mid-range laptop. If they both work at the same speed, Bob will get more done. It is the best interest of the employer to put up the money for better equipment. So what is an employer going to do in this situation? Do they upgrade Bill so that he can be more productive? That's not fair to Bob who already spent a lot of money on his laptop. What happens if one of their laptops breaks and they cannot afford to fix it; are they out of a job? In grading productivity do they account for their machine's speed? There are just too many problems with this system.
It's easy to say "life isn't fair" and chalk this up as another thing that is "just the way it is", but I think that's one of the many things wrong in the world today. Everyone deserves an equal chance, and it shouldn't be about how expensive of a laptop you can buy, because then some of the best and most productive workers will be out of a job. To me, that is a completely idiotic way to run a business. Your personal equipment should not affect your chances of landing a job.
Plugs on an LT1 (Camaro) is a 4 hour+ job, done mostly from under the car. I'd gladly pay someone to do it, especially since my apartment doesn't allow me to work on cars here.
I don't mind paying someone for their labor (even if they're Best Buy), but I think $30 is a bit expensive. Some geek squad kid could do 10 of these at once, and I'd imagine in under an hour (haven't done it myself.) The equates to $300+ an hour, which just isn't right. This is the kind of thing you do for free as a promotion to bring customers in.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't be ridiculous. You can't fit it all on a thumb drive.
Luckily we're getting both. I just purchased a video card that's twice as powerful as my current one, and only uses 2/3 the power. I'm upgrading from a CPU using up to 130W to just 77W, but still gaining 20-25% performance.
Those are some good jumps in performance, but great leaps in efficiency. Total power consumption is a big factor moving forward in trying to reduce what we need from the grid.
In my opinion, the best option is just to buy two separate drives. Get a cheaper 120GB drive for your OS/programs, and continue to use hard drives for mass storage. There aren't huge performance differences when it comes to things like video, mp3s, or pictures. The place where you'll see the most benefit is OS loading speed, or how fast programs launch and games load.
I've used hybrid drives, and they are pretty good option for laptops, but you're really better off spending the extra money on a true solid state drive if it will be enough to contain your data.
You know, if they gave me an option of a $1 or $2 discount on my bill where they sold this information, I'd be totally ok with that. The thing is, they're just going to make more money and we'll never see a dime in savings for sacrificing our privacy.
Except when it comes to gaming. That's one of the only places you can't find apps for one OS to replace another.
It's also the main reason I run Windows. Otherwise, Ubuntu and an Office clone would do anything I need.
Yes, but you can't measure "good UI" in an Excel diagram
I beg to differ. http://i.imgur.com/teooN.png
I bought my 1 Exabyte drive there a while back. For some reason it keeps overwriting my data though!
For me it was high school. I started browsing Slashdot late 97 or early 98. Before I knew it, I was here daily.
I never posted much, but I always read comments. I still remember the first time I got mod points. I felt so important. ;)
Slashdot is associated with a lot of memories for me. Not only has it been a huge source of my tech news, but also a topic of discussion amongst friends. "Did you see that article on Slashdot?" was something I probably heard every day. Good times.
Commander Taco, you will be missed.
Oh I'm sure if Facebook had a successful search engine and a host of other useful service they'd be doing this too.
Considering I saw this video a year ago, "nearing production" is a relative term. They do mention the article the same thing that's been holding these devices back, which is the lack of a non-tethered power source.
Until we get past that hurdle, I wouldn't say it's anywhere near production.
Regardless of how this applies to NASA's missions, fueling this type of creativity today will bring better innovation tomorrow.
Either my sarcasm meter is malfunctioning, or you're actually serious.
Do you really expect government action in this matter? As much as you might think otherwise, your PSN account isn't a matter of national security. Not to mention that killing someone over theft is ludicrous.
Sony is responsible for keeping their servers secure.
I have to agree. This is something you are supposed to think, but not say. Once you lose your intimidation factor, more people are likely to attack.
They also charge a monthly fee, just sayin'.
Could you cite some examples of the poor security? I would rate Windows 7 in the fair or even good category of security. Homegroups now give home users the ability to lock down and encrypt their traffic over their network. Bitlocker provides disk encryption options. UAC can help end users from accidentally clicking on things they shouldn't. Most people find it annoying and disable it, but that's not Microsoft's fault. Built in firewalls have been getting better, and you won't find nearly as many exposed machines on the net because of the Home/Work/Public selection option when you connect to network.
Compared to other versions of Windows, 7 (and even Vista) are leaps beyond what they were before. Samba in Win9x was ridiculously insecure, but all of those holes have been plugged.
It's not very often that I hear about a zero day exploit taking down networks like we had with the worms in the early 2000s. The words "MS Blaster" would strike fear into the hearts of any admin who had to deal with it. I haven't seen anything wreak havoc like it since.
Most network security issues, in my experience, are due to poor network administration rather than holes in the operating system itself. I can't help but feel that the parent comment is a somewhat empty statement.
Yes, I am aware that HTTP is a protocol. People often use it for transferring HTML language.
Sure, just enter it in on the touchscreen LCD display.
HTTP Protocol? Uh-oh...better get some money out of the ATM Machine for a new NIC Card.
To be fair, 50 out of 1000 is still a 1 in 20 chance. You can't plan for everything though.
From what I understand, the people receiving the machine would be the ones hacking it in the first place. I don't think there would be a problem.
There's no need to get a condescending tone about it. There is nothing "obvious" about it.
I have worked corporate IT, small business IT, and at one time ran my own business. There are many jobs where you are expected to have your own tools, but it varies from employer to employer. Most respectable companies supply their employees with everything they need. It's usually the mom n' pops or startup companies that force employees to buy their own stuff. The shop I bring my car to supplies tools for all of their mechanics. This makes it very easy to hire new techs, and makes sure that they have everything they need to do a job properly.
When people buy their own tools it can affect the quality of work being done. If you buy cheap tools, you will undoubtedly have more problems getting things done than someone with ones that have all the bells and whistles. With computers this is especially true.
Staying on the topic though, here's an example. Let's say Bob has a new laptop with the latest processor, 6 gigs of RAM, and a solid state drive, while Bill is working on a 4 year old mid-range laptop. If they both work at the same speed, Bob will get more done. It is the best interest of the employer to put up the money for better equipment. So what is an employer going to do in this situation? Do they upgrade Bill so that he can be more productive? That's not fair to Bob who already spent a lot of money on his laptop. What happens if one of their laptops breaks and they cannot afford to fix it; are they out of a job? In grading productivity do they account for their machine's speed? There are just too many problems with this system.
It's easy to say "life isn't fair" and chalk this up as another thing that is "just the way it is", but I think that's one of the many things wrong in the world today. Everyone deserves an equal chance, and it shouldn't be about how expensive of a laptop you can buy, because then some of the best and most productive workers will be out of a job. To me, that is a completely idiotic way to run a business. Your personal equipment should not affect your chances of landing a job.
My secrets don't involve tax dollars and the welfare of a nation. If I was a public servant, I would expect my work to be public as well.
HORRAY! This will finally be the year of the Linux deskt....
aww.....
(for some reason this sounds much funnier if you imagine Zoidberg saying it)
Agreed, this is not news for nerds; it's news for end users.
Plugs on an LT1 (Camaro) is a 4 hour+ job, done mostly from under the car. I'd gladly pay someone to do it, especially since my apartment doesn't allow me to work on cars here.
I don't mind paying someone for their labor (even if they're Best Buy), but I think $30 is a bit expensive. Some geek squad kid could do 10 of these at once, and I'd imagine in under an hour (haven't done it myself.) The equates to $300+ an hour, which just isn't right. This is the kind of thing you do for free as a promotion to bring customers in.
Douchebaggery ensues...