It doesn't exist for a reason. Standard slots have a defined shape and size. When you're working in a world where your motherboard needs to be as tiny as possible, and fit around all the other components (like fans, batteries, etc), having stuff with a predefined size and shape narrows the design space, and makes a good laptop harder to produce. I mean, look at the retina MacBook Pro's logic board, where do you propose a standard graphics card slot goes on that? And no – on top is not the correct answer, the machine's too thin to mount something on top of, or below the logic board.
The other reason is that laptops generally run fairly marginal on cooling. A laptop designed to have a 30W GPU in it is not going to sufficiently cool a 45W GPU.
EA, Activision, ad Microsoft are the only 3 american companies there, and they're publishers, not developers. Moreso, Activision is now being propped up by Blizzard, which admitedly is not Scottish, but is also not American (it's French).
By comparison, Rockstar, Ruffian, RealTimeWorlds (now eeGeo), and countless other smaller companies are based in Scotland.
Since when do you need to sync with a computer at all? Since iOS 5, there's absolutely no functionality on the iPhone that can't be done with the phone only, and no computer.
No, I genuinely don't know what he means –what's the supposed difference between a program that runs on a computer, and a program that runs on a small computer?
Apps are worthless pieces of junk that never do anything correctly.
If you wanted actual security, you'd use a real program to do it instead of an app.
Sorry, but what's the difference? You do realise that App is short for "Application", i.e. what apple calls every program on your machine. On OS X (and iOS) the equivalent to the.exe extension is.app.
And that's exactly the point –the older tech is not more reliable. You couldn't predict whether any of it will last at any greater hit rate than you can for any modern stuff. It just happens that you have hindsight on your find for the old stuff.
Often confusing equipment they bought 20 years ago that cost thousands of dollars and comparing them against their modern counterpart that cost a few hundred bucks.
Interesting, I always assumed that it had an element of confirmation bias to it. "I have a hard disk from 20 years ago that still works" gets conflated with "hard disks from 20 years ago last 20 years", as they ignore all the disks that had failed.
Where I live the posted limits are 75 mph. Very few people here drive that slow unless the radar detector is going off or there is a cop actually in view.
The reason I know this is because I *do* drive the posted limit, and I am *constantly* being passed.
Arguing semantics But actually, that isn't valid reasoning. Even if you're constantly being passed, that's not a proof that the number of people passing you is greater than the number of people matching your speed exactly.
Sure, but you buy a pen for them once every month, a computer once every 2 years, and a desk once every 20 years. That's on average $1000 a year (assuming a pretty damn impressive computer) per engineer. Compare that against the marketing guys, who probably need to fly out to somewhere once every month, possibly internationally, so, account $1000 for flights per month; $1000 for hotels (assuming a week away); a few $2000 conference tickets in the year; a couple of $20,000 booths at conferences; a telephone budget of a few thousand a year.
Actually 1 divided by 0 is not infinity. It's simply an invalid computation. 1 divided by an infinitesimally small number is infinity. That's a very different thing.
Indeed – what are Engineering's expenses outside labour? A few computers, that's about it. Marketting will need to fly all over the place to you know sell some shit.
If you want to compare what your company spends on convincing everyone how awesome the stuff they make is, with how much they spend on making something awesome, include the labour costs too. I'd bet heavily that they're spending an awful lot on the people who make awesome things.
I don't understand why people don't see how simple this is The extended warranty companies are making a profit. Therefore, on average, they will make more money than they pay out to you. Therefore, if you can cover the capitol cost of the device breaking, you will, on average, come out up by not having an extended warranty.
Actually, the whole north bridge is on the chip, and has been since LGA1156 for intel. For AMD, they only moved it on with socket FM2 (the most recent APUs).
The only thing that's external is the "platform host controller", which is a renamed south bridge. Haswell is integrating chunks of the south bridge onto the CPU too.
The fastest $25 graphics card on newegg is a radeon 5450, which even the current HD4000 beats.
If we allow up to $50, we get a GT620, which still gets narrowly beaten.
You need to get to $75 cards to find ones that beat the current HD4000, and will be about level with the GT3e. The current AMD A10 graphics are about 40% faster than the HD4000, and hence will be about 42% slower than the GT3e.
So no, we're not seeing any kind of kerb stomping here.
First: Metro is all on lowest settings and scores between 11-25FPS
Okay, so one single game shows poorish performance, and will show entirely adequate performance on Haswell GT3e.
Second: Crisis I am not sure how performance is higher than mainstream... unless "performance" is just a nicer way to say lowest quality, highest performance.
In other words, it manages 60fps already on lowest settings, and will do 120-150fps on Haswell, and manages 30-40fps on decent settings, and will manage 60-80 on Haswell.
Third: The resolutions they are talking about are 1366x768 which might have been relevant 10 years ago, but are hardly what I would call modern.
Actually, 1366x768 is the single most common resolution out there these days on new machines. This is more true on laptops, which these IGPs are aimed at, where it ships on 95% of machines. Sure, us geeks are likely to want shiny retina mac book pros with 2880x1800 screens, but for the vast majority of people these chips will open up gaming at decent quality levels on integrated chips.
Actually, if you look at some Benchmarks You'll see that the current (Ivy Bridge) chips play current games at 30-40fps (even Crysis on pretty high detail settings). So you're looking at 60-100fps with Haswell's GT3e.
Slashdot Mirror
It doesn't exist for a reason. Standard slots have a defined shape and size. When you're working in a world where your motherboard needs to be as tiny as possible, and fit around all the other components (like fans, batteries, etc), having stuff with a predefined size and shape narrows the design space, and makes a good laptop harder to produce. I mean, look at the retina MacBook Pro's logic board, where do you propose a standard graphics card slot goes on that? And no – on top is not the correct answer, the machine's too thin to mount something on top of, or below the logic board.
The other reason is that laptops generally run fairly marginal on cooling. A laptop designed to have a 30W GPU in it is not going to sufficiently cool a 45W GPU.
EA, Activision, ad Microsoft are the only 3 american companies there, and they're publishers, not developers. Moreso, Activision is now being propped up by Blizzard, which admitedly is not Scottish, but is also not American (it's French).
By comparison, Rockstar, Ruffian, RealTimeWorlds (now eeGeo), and countless other smaller companies are based in Scotland.
Oddly, Apple already stores the media on their servers, something about running a shop or other ;).
Long story short, media does not count towards your quota, you can just redownload from the store at any moment.
Your media can be downloaded as required via iCloud.
Games? Most big games are produced in Scotland, not the US.
They are, they already do what you describe. The author is a troll.
Since when do you need to sync with a computer at all? Since iOS 5, there's absolutely no functionality on the iPhone that can't be done with the phone only, and no computer.
Right... because changing the password hash on the disk totally changes how all the data is encrypted. Wait... no.
No, I genuinely don't know what he means –what's the supposed difference between a program that runs on a computer, and a program that runs on a small computer?
Apps are worthless pieces of junk that never do anything correctly.
If you wanted actual security, you'd use a real program to do it instead of an app.
Sorry, but what's the difference? You do realise that App is short for "Application", i.e. what apple calls every program on your machine. On OS X (and iOS) the equivalent to the .exe extension is .app.
Joining, and discovering are not the same thing. You don't need to join a network for your phone to register it as near your location.
And that's exactly the point –the older tech is not more reliable. You couldn't predict whether any of it will last at any greater hit rate than you can for any modern stuff. It just happens that you have hindsight on your find for the old stuff.
Often confusing equipment they bought 20 years ago that cost thousands of dollars and comparing them against their modern counterpart that cost a few hundred bucks.
Interesting, I always assumed that it had an element of confirmation bias to it. "I have a hard disk from 20 years ago that still works" gets conflated with "hard disks from 20 years ago last 20 years", as they ignore all the disks that had failed.
What makes you think older tech is more reliable?
Where I live the posted limits are 75 mph. Very few people here drive that slow unless the radar detector is going off or there is a cop actually in view.
The reason I know this is because I *do* drive the posted limit, and I am *constantly* being passed.
Arguing semantics But actually, that isn't valid reasoning. Even if you're constantly being passed, that's not a proof that the number of people passing you is greater than the number of people matching your speed exactly.
Because at n equals 0, the statement is not true.
And this is why it's important to say "the limit as n tends to 0" rather than "where n = 0" ;)
Sure, but you buy a pen for them once every month, a computer once every 2 years, and a desk once every 20 years. That's on average $1000 a year (assuming a pretty damn impressive computer) per engineer. Compare that against the marketing guys, who probably need to fly out to somewhere once every month, possibly internationally, so, account $1000 for flights per month; $1000 for hotels (assuming a week away); a few $2000 conference tickets in the year; a couple of $20,000 booths at conferences; a telephone budget of a few thousand a year.
I don't get why this is unexpected.
Actually 1 divided by 0 is not infinity. It's simply an invalid computation. 1 divided by an infinitesimally small number is infinity. That's a very different thing.
Indeed – what are Engineering's expenses outside labour? A few computers, that's about it. Marketting will need to fly all over the place to you know sell some shit.
If you want to compare what your company spends on convincing everyone how awesome the stuff they make is, with how much they spend on making something awesome, include the labour costs too. I'd bet heavily that they're spending an awful lot on the people who make awesome things.
I don't understand why people don't see how simple this is The extended warranty companies are making a profit. Therefore, on average, they will make more money than they pay out to you. Therefore, if you can cover the capitol cost of the device breaking, you will, on average, come out up by not having an extended warranty.
Actually, the whole north bridge is on the chip, and has been since LGA1156 for intel. For AMD, they only moved it on with socket FM2 (the most recent APUs).
The only thing that's external is the "platform host controller", which is a renamed south bridge. Haswell is integrating chunks of the south bridge onto the CPU too.
The fastest $25 graphics card on newegg is a radeon 5450, which even the current HD4000 beats.
If we allow up to $50, we get a GT620, which still gets narrowly beaten.
You need to get to $75 cards to find ones that beat the current HD4000, and will be about level with the GT3e. The current AMD A10 graphics are about 40% faster than the HD4000, and hence will be about 42% slower than the GT3e.
So no, we're not seeing any kind of kerb stomping here.
First: Metro is all on lowest settings and scores between 11-25FPS
Okay, so one single game shows poorish performance, and will show entirely adequate performance on Haswell GT3e.
Second: Crisis I am not sure how performance is higher than mainstream... unless "performance" is just a nicer way to say lowest quality, highest performance.
In other words, it manages 60fps already on lowest settings, and will do 120-150fps on Haswell, and manages 30-40fps on decent settings, and will manage 60-80 on Haswell.
Third: The resolutions they are talking about are 1366x768 which might have been relevant 10 years ago, but are hardly what I would call modern.
Actually, 1366x768 is the single most common resolution out there these days on new machines. This is more true on laptops, which these IGPs are aimed at, where it ships on 95% of machines. Sure, us geeks are likely to want shiny retina mac book pros with 2880x1800 screens, but for the vast majority of people these chips will open up gaming at decent quality levels on integrated chips.
Actually, if you look at some Benchmarks You'll see that the current (Ivy Bridge) chips play current games at 30-40fps (even Crysis on pretty high detail settings). So you're looking at 60-100fps with Haswell's GT3e.