"USB 2.0 real world speeds are around 30-40mb/sec because of all the overhead. A low end hard drive can easily do 60+ mb/sec and bursts well over 100 mb/sec."
You mean MB.
Its obvious he meant megabytes. Christ, do you need to be such a snot-nosed pedant?
I have it on good authority that the OP meant millibits. 30-40mb/sec translates to one bit around every 30 seconds, so you can see why he's not too happy with USB 2.0's performance.
Clearly you didn't understand my post. I was saying that until it's industry standard to include USB 3.0 on new computers the way 2.0 is now (and it was far from an overnight transition), we will continue seeing USB 2.0 as the highest speed USB ports on most new machines.
Hello captain obvious.
I'm not sure it even deserves to be called "obvious".
He's saying that USB 3.0 won't be installed in most machines as standard until it's installed in most machines as standard. Unfortunately, I can't think what the logical term for this sort of argument is (anyone?)
Actually there's nothing inherently wrong with this idea, the flaw was not putting a "Don't show this message again" checkbox at the bottom of the dialog.
The initial failure to anticipate the USB-1.1-only situation and (worse) their later failure to correct it was gross stupidity if you ask me. You're right that it's desirable to let people know about this (even in situations where they only had 1.1, they might consider upgrading and should be aware of performance issues). But the inability to tell it to STFU combined with stupidity like saying "click here to find USB 2.0 ports" and *then* saying "you don't have any USB 2.0 ports" (where applicable) rather than saying that in the first place is crap design, and the least they could have done was fixed it in SP1 or whatever when it was obvious how crap it was.
I wasn't implying otherwise. I mentioned the Spectrum not to disprove some point you were making, but to further illustrate that the best-specced machines don't always dominate- far from it- and that network effects are responsible for this.
BTW, if you want me to nitpick, the C64 itself used the 6510, a slightly expanded version of the original 6502, not the original design.:-)
of user interface design that different things should look different?
*Looking* different and actually being different enough to require faffing about with an adapter are two different things. I accept your point to some extent, but I'm not convinced that the benefit of forcing people to use different connectors to help distinguish things would outweigh the inconvenience.
Isn't it a good thing that the nozzle for Diesel gas and the nozzle for regular gas are different so that you can't mistakenly put Diesel in a car that can't use it?
The capitalisation isn't required unless Diesel have started selling gasoline.:-)
On second thoughts, that Freudian slip is a dead giveaway that you're a stereotypical designer/brand-name-obsessed Apple stereotype;-)
Nope. If you look at the winners over the last 30 years, it was NEVER the most powerful console
One notable example in the UK was the Sinclair ZX Spectrum, by far the most popular 8-bit computer here (*). It was the first computer with true high-resolution colour and sound that was affordable for most people in the UK. While not as advanced as the C64, it was an excellent machine for the price when it first came out.
In the following year or so, lots of equally good (or marginally better) "me too" machines came out at the same or slightly lower prices. Yet they all flopped in the long term, and the Spectrum continued to dominate. Why?
Because it achieved critical mass at the right time. The virtuous circle meant availability of cheap commercial software was very high and its ubiquity was also an advantage for playground tape piracy. Which in turn made it more popular.
This ensured the Spectrum's popularity *long* after it was looking long-in-the-tooth. A 128K model (1985) replaced the much-derided single-channel beeper with a generic 3-channel soundchip, but otherwise the core machine remained the same.
Most notably, the failure to upgrade the fast-dating graphics meant it retained the compromises in colour resolution and (IMHO) the limited- and garish palette. More modern games with more sophisticated graphics (and backgrounds) suffered because there was no way to avoid these limitations, only minimise them. Spectrum games look far more badly dated than those on the C64.
Yet people continued to buy them like hot cakes. Why? As I already said, software, software, software.
The Spectrum gained a critical mass at the right time and dominated long after it had been technically left behind. It's not the first, and it won't be the last time.
(*) We had the C64 here, but the fact it was never as cheap as the Spectrum and the lower disposable income of the UK vs. the US at that time meant it stayed in a respectable but clear second place. (Also, AFAIK, the C64 was never price-slashed quite as aggressively here as it was in the US).
Maybe you should say that you are delighted that they have accepted your "call review service" at $X per call plus $Y per minute. [..] In which case you have an address to send them an invoice.
Yeah, that's going to be a raging success (just like the previous thousand times something similar's been suggested on Slashdot.)
They've been running a scam and ripping people off without concern as to whether it's legal. But they're *definitely* going to fork out when some (not-so) smartass basement dweller sends them an invoice for some half-baked quasi-legalistic scheme they thought up.
I was trying to use the new punctuation, the ~ to mean sarcasm.
I've only ever seen that in one guy's.sig, which came across as him unilaterally taking it upon himself to invent some form of punctuation then expecting everyone to adopt it.
I might be wrong, I just haven't seen it elsewhere.
many smoke particles are smaller than air molecules (ok, N2 and O2)
Citation needed.
You're not seriously suggesting that smoke particles are smaller than N2 or O2 are you? The only way I can think of that is that you're talking about *molecules* (or atoms) of potentially damaging substances, which wouldn't be what most people would consider "smoke particles".
I might be wrong, though I'd be interested to hear your answer if I was.
When I was younger I was always under the impression that summer "officially" started on the 21st of June and ran for three months. However, I'm not sure who defined that, and "official" or not, it's a crap definition.
Even allowing for thermal lag skewing the hottest part of the year closer to mid-July, any definition of summer that doesn't even *start* until the longest day and only includes the tail-end of June but manages to cover most of September is idiotic.
Even regarding the variable nature of the British summer (downright awful for the past three years), in my opinion it starts in mid-to-late May, start of June at the latest. (I note that Wikipedia claims the meteorological definition of summer is June, July and August- much more satisfactory).
And while September is a strange month that in a good year can sometimes push summer almost to the equinox, this year (and last) the first yellow leaves on the trees appeared at the start of the month.
Similarly, if one is determined to stick to the three-month model, the earliest spring-like activity is already underway by the start of March.
That's just the UK, but I don't know where that "summer doesn't start until June 21st" crap originated. It's pretty useless...
The case is either Al or steel sheet metal, easily recyclable. The toxic sludge and heavy metals in the PCB, capacitors and solder are the problem. Call me when they invent cardboard solder.
Bingo. And what about the energy and resources involved in producing the internal components? Apparently these are very high (e.g. in terms of water, etc.)
I don't want to sound too much like I'm attacking an idea which may well have been intended as no more than an interesting concept (albeit one that's been done and reported on Slashdot on at least one previous occasion). Still, it smacks of those feelgood/sounds-good prominent but tokenistic green efforts that are all too commonly the focus of bandwagon-jumping PR-oriented greenery.
Seriously though, how can you browse the web *without* adblock?
Well.... I know you had IE in mind, but I browse the web quite happily with Firefox running Flashblock and image.animation_mode set to once (via about:config).
I think you're an imposter! If you were a real retro computer fan on a nostalgia trip, you'd be thinking of it as "8K" or "64K". No-one ever even called it "64KB" in those days, let alone the vile SI-nitpickers-in-cahoots-with-marketers-pandering-vileness that is "64KiB" (spit!)
Slashdot Mirror
I fucked your dead great grandmother while taking a dump on a gameboy color.
That's a neat trick considering his great grandmother was cremated and her ashes scattered in the Atlantic Ocean.
your joke kinda falls flat since Karlt1 did explicitly say, "However, while I don't know about Macs [...]"
Umm... that's what I get for not reading the whole thing properly. :-/
(Or they are Vin Diesel fans, perhaps.)
Diesel have invented a wine as well?! Those designer bastards will plaster their name on anything! ;-)
A majority of *old* hard drives. The SSD market is exploding very rapidly
That news report brought to you by the Department of Redundancy Department.
;-)
Sorry
"USB 2.0 real world speeds are around 30-40mb/sec because of all the overhead. A low end hard drive can easily do 60+ mb/sec and bursts well over 100 mb/sec."
You mean MB.
Its obvious he meant megabytes. Christ, do you need to be such a snot-nosed pedant?
I have it on good authority that the OP meant millibits. 30-40mb/sec translates to one bit around every 30 seconds, so you can see why he's not too happy with USB 2.0's performance.
Clearly you didn't understand my post. I was saying that until it's industry standard to include USB 3.0 on new computers the way 2.0 is now (and it was far from an overnight transition), we will continue seeing USB 2.0 as the highest speed USB ports on most new machines.
Hello captain obvious.
I'm not sure it even deserves to be called "obvious".
He's saying that USB 3.0 won't be installed in most machines as standard until it's installed in most machines as standard. Unfortunately, I can't think what the logical term for this sort of argument is (anyone?)
Actually there's nothing inherently wrong with this idea, the flaw was not putting a "Don't show this message again" checkbox at the bottom of the dialog.
The initial failure to anticipate the USB-1.1-only situation and (worse) their later failure to correct it was gross stupidity if you ask me. You're right that it's desirable to let people know about this (even in situations where they only had 1.1, they might consider upgrading and should be aware of performance issues). But the inability to tell it to STFU combined with stupidity like saying "click here to find USB 2.0 ports" and *then* saying "you don't have any USB 2.0 ports" (where applicable) rather than saying that in the first place is crap design, and the least they could have done was fixed it in SP1 or whatever when it was obvious how crap it was.
I wasn't implying otherwise. I mentioned the Spectrum not to disprove some point you were making, but to further illustrate that the best-specced machines don't always dominate- far from it- and that network effects are responsible for this.
:-)
BTW, if you want me to nitpick, the C64 itself used the 6510, a slightly expanded version of the original 6502, not the original design.
Isn't one of the tenants
Tenets.
of user interface design that different things should look different?
*Looking* different and actually being different enough to require faffing about with an adapter are two different things. I accept your point to some extent, but I'm not convinced that the benefit of forcing people to use different connectors to help distinguish things would outweigh the inconvenience.
Isn't it a good thing that the nozzle for Diesel gas and the nozzle for regular gas are different so that you can't mistakenly put Diesel in a car that can't use it?
The capitalisation isn't required unless Diesel have started selling gasoline. :-)
;-)
On second thoughts, that Freudian slip is a dead giveaway that you're a stereotypical designer/brand-name-obsessed Apple stereotype
Nope. If you look at the winners over the last 30 years, it was NEVER the most powerful console
One notable example in the UK was the Sinclair ZX Spectrum, by far the most popular 8-bit computer here (*). It was the first computer with true high-resolution colour and sound that was affordable for most people in the UK. While not as advanced as the C64, it was an excellent machine for the price when it first came out.
In the following year or so, lots of equally good (or marginally better) "me too" machines came out at the same or slightly lower prices. Yet they all flopped in the long term, and the Spectrum continued to dominate. Why?
Because it achieved critical mass at the right time. The virtuous circle meant availability of cheap commercial software was very high and its ubiquity was also an advantage for playground tape piracy. Which in turn made it more popular.
This ensured the Spectrum's popularity *long* after it was looking long-in-the-tooth. A 128K model (1985) replaced the much-derided single-channel beeper with a generic 3-channel soundchip, but otherwise the core machine remained the same.
Most notably, the failure to upgrade the fast-dating graphics meant it retained the compromises in colour resolution and (IMHO) the limited- and garish palette. More modern games with more sophisticated graphics (and backgrounds) suffered because there was no way to avoid these limitations, only minimise them. Spectrum games look far more badly dated than those on the C64.
Yet people continued to buy them like hot cakes. Why? As I already said, software, software, software.
The Spectrum gained a critical mass at the right time and dominated long after it had been technically left behind. It's not the first, and it won't be the last time.
(*) We had the C64 here, but the fact it was never as cheap as the Spectrum and the lower disposable income of the UK vs. the US at that time meant it stayed in a respectable but clear second place. (Also, AFAIK, the C64 was never price-slashed quite as aggressively here as it was in the US).
I think you just crossed the line between grammar Nazi and ass-hole...
I like the way that being an "ass-hole" is implied to be worse than being a "Nazi"(!)
That way the neighbors can remind them what happens to nazis in the end.
You mean by giving them a free trip to South America?
Maybe you should say that you are delighted that they have accepted your "call review service" at $X per call plus $Y per minute. [..] In which case you have an address to send them an invoice.
Yeah, that's going to be a raging success (just like the previous thousand times something similar's been suggested on Slashdot.)
They've been running a scam and ripping people off without concern as to whether it's legal. But they're *definitely* going to fork out when some (not-so) smartass basement dweller sends them an invoice for some half-baked quasi-legalistic scheme they thought up.
Of course not. You must have it. Now that you have Dewar's represented, should you also add Dickface Brand for half the price?
You have *no* idea what you're talking about.
Everyone knows that Dickface Brand is a bourbon, not a scotch.
Agreed. I just didn't know any other way to make it obvious it was a joke.
Well, the winking smiley ;-) is the traditional way of highlighting a joke, as opposed to a scheme one person out of six billion has agreed to (^_^)
I was trying to use the new punctuation, the ~ to mean sarcasm.
I've only ever seen that in one guy's .sig, which came across as him unilaterally taking it upon himself to invent some form of punctuation then expecting everyone to adopt it.
I might be wrong, I just haven't seen it elsewhere.
many smoke particles are smaller than air molecules (ok, N2 and O2)
Citation needed.
You're not seriously suggesting that smoke particles are smaller than N2 or O2 are you? The only way I can think of that is that you're talking about *molecules* (or atoms) of potentially damaging substances, which wouldn't be what most people would consider "smoke particles".
I might be wrong, though I'd be interested to hear your answer if I was.
When I was younger I was always under the impression that summer "officially" started on the 21st of June and ran for three months. However, I'm not sure who defined that, and "official" or not, it's a crap definition.
Even allowing for thermal lag skewing the hottest part of the year closer to mid-July, any definition of summer that doesn't even *start* until the longest day and only includes the tail-end of June but manages to cover most of September is idiotic.
Even regarding the variable nature of the British summer (downright awful for the past three years), in my opinion it starts in mid-to-late May, start of June at the latest. (I note that Wikipedia claims the meteorological definition of summer is June, July and August- much more satisfactory).
And while September is a strange month that in a good year can sometimes push summer almost to the equinox, this year (and last) the first yellow leaves on the trees appeared at the start of the month.
Similarly, if one is determined to stick to the three-month model, the earliest spring-like activity is already underway by the start of March.
That's just the UK, but I don't know where that "summer doesn't start until June 21st" crap originated. It's pretty useless...
The case is either Al or steel sheet metal, easily recyclable. The toxic sludge and heavy metals in the PCB, capacitors and solder are the problem. Call me when they invent cardboard solder.
Bingo. And what about the energy and resources involved in producing the internal components? Apparently these are very high (e.g. in terms of water, etc.)
I don't want to sound too much like I'm attacking an idea which may well have been intended as no more than an interesting concept (albeit one that's been done and reported on Slashdot on at least one previous occasion). Still, it smacks of those feelgood/sounds-good prominent but tokenistic green efforts that are all too commonly the focus of bandwagon-jumping PR-oriented greenery.
It isn't monitoring their health status, it is monitoring their excertion level.
You mean the teachers are measuring how much they're crapping in the toilet? Eeww... that's definitely going too far!
Seriously though, how can you browse the web *without* adblock?
Well.... I know you had IE in mind, but I browse the web quite happily with Firefox running Flashblock and image.animation_mode set to once (via about:config).
... for this kind of story.
Yeah, I liked it as well. Inspiring stuff, better than the usual "Apple were dicks to some bandwagon-jumping iPhone developers" and similar IT stuff.
According to the Federation Internationale D'espace, space begins at 62 miles, about 100 kilometers. Often referred to as the 62 mile club.
Is that supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek reference to the Mile high club? I suspect that membership of this one is considerably harder to achieve ;-)
At least in that case, people died
So you're actually saying it would be better if crappy JavaScript caused people to die??!
On the bright side, I used my corporate discount and corporate debit card to buy this sweet 17" MacBook Pro. (Right back at you BillG and SteveB!)
You fool! Surely they'll send Rover [wikipedia.org] for you now! RUN!
That's not actually Rover. Steve Ballmer just looks like that from a distance...
I think you're an imposter! If you were a real retro computer fan on a nostalgia trip, you'd be thinking of it as "8K" or "64K". No-one ever even called it "64KB" in those days, let alone the vile SI-nitpickers-in-cahoots-with-marketers-pandering-vileness that is "64KiB" (spit!)