You forgot a few: - easy to solder on board [nope] - wear leveling [nope] - possibility to do TRIM [nope] - encryption? [nope]
And in RAID: - boot (in RAID) [nope] - no drivers needed (in RAID) [nope] - cheaper than the proposed solution (in RAID) [nope] - smaller than the proposed solution (in RAID) [nope] - less than 15 needed for sufficient speeds [nope]
Informative? Guy says that micro SD exists and could compete with this product? This is not the same product at all.
But you can already do those with USB based flash components. The added write leveling and speed of an SSD is not really needed for those applications. Of course, that does not matter if the price is right, but I suspect that that might not be the case.
It may be a lot cheaper, but it will also be a lot slower, smaller and most importantly, it will probably not do write leveling in the way higher end SSD's do. You may not need that for your NAS, but other builders should be aware of this fact.
These drives could indeed flourish in the (cheaper) netbook / NAS / internet appliance / TV-as-PC / tablet market and possibly the high end smart phone market as well. My Android just had a 70 MB upgrade to 2.1 and it took quite a long time for it to download and reboot. I'm betting part of that is the flash on the device. Especially netbooks are just made for SSD's. 2.5" drives currently have just one advantage over these kind of SSD's: capacity. All the other things are fully in the SSD camp. It's a shame that the first netbooks came with a rather sub-par flash drive.
Yes, but this one seems to be easy to manufacture. The biggest manufacturing problem with the keyboard is probably the protection of the screen underneath, and the focus on the keys itself. Obviously, it would have been better looking if they used the Apple style kind of keys instead of the normal large black ones found on most other keyboards. But other than that, this seems to be a cheap touch sensitive LCD with a keyboard on top.
As for the use, I am not sure that a normal (widescreen) LCD is the way to go. I'm even more sure that I would hate the light emission from the screen. Maybe they should include a method of turning the back light on and off - e.g. when touch typing is detected or when no keys are hit, turn everything off. The problem with many innovations like this is that researchers are too focused on the new technology to let it blend in well.
The read speed and random IO is very good compared to HDD's and older SSD designs. Intel SSD's have not made too much progress lately and have been taken over left & right regarding raw data speeds. That said, I truly love my Intel SSD and there are more important things than raw data speeds.
I haven't seen a single student drag his desktop to college, so I presume you can drop the "supposedly" from the sentence above. Laptop have overtaken desktops a long time ago in sales, even outside of college (where laptops make much more sense).
My next "desktop" probably is a laptop with the capability of dual screens...with SSD, high amounts of RAM and external hard drives (and -in my case - no need for a very high end graphics card) there simply is little reason not to go for a laptop. Keeping two computers is a pain too.
I've lost quite a few people in my lifetime, and personally I would not want to know anything more than what I shared with them while they were alive. And unless there are certain enigma's tearing apart a family or something similar, I would highly recommend to not dig too deep. Remember the people like they were during their lifetime, not some image you get when you start digging into their writings.
You collect stuff when you are alive because you think that you or somebody else might take a look at it at some point in the future. That future does not necessarily include the period after the collector died.
If your post was insightful then this post must be a revelation to the mods out there today.
"How can we be sure all those digits are correct?"
Manual comparison. They read the first million or so digits aloud, and if those digits don't match the ones from previous programs then there is something wrong in the algorithm.
"And, more important question, what are they for?"
Comparison of size of course, people do that all the time. But in this case it's more about who is able to write the most optimal application than anything else.
Ehm, ONE copper connection? Give Joe Sixpack a wire that actually has to run back to the computer and he will certainly hang himself with it, never mind that eye. Or do you want to connect all devices to the radiator of the central heating system?
I guess that if there are faster interfaces then there are faster interfaces. But it is like saying hard drives are better than SSD because of size or cost per gigabyte. This interface can use (a probably cheap) long / strong thin & flexible cable. That alone should make such a thing interesting. Think HD-TV on the other side of the room for instance. This cable should easily fit under the carpet or something like that.
That Intel has been so present minded to be able to interleave different protocols. I still have a grey box (queue: painted black) under my desk and I would love a single cable to the monitors and such on top of the desk. If the monitors could be extended to support daisy chaining and eSATA on top of the USB/card reader, I'm all for it. Of course, you could do the same thing with electrical wiring, but for now Intel seems to be the only one to think this out well.
Yeah, well, a friend of mine did that too, and after a while the inside of his car was completely messed up because some homeless person had slept (and probably everything else) in it. Don't do this while you are parked in a city.
You are just comparing hardware Try comparing software as well. Most enterprise PC's have many things added to it like network drives with Word templates (or even your "profile"), virus scanners etc. Maybe it is trying to see if there is an update of the software on the LAN. Or maybe it's just other versions of Windows/Office. This is why you cannot do simple comparisons like these anymore, computers are just to complex for that.
Smalltalk is a very very interesting programming language from a technical point of view. After having tried the language and especially the "living objects" kind of runtime systems, I'm not so sure if the actual implementation of it all is practical.
Smalltalk certainly takes a lot of getting used to. After having it tried only a few evenings, I still haven't fully made up my mind about it. Coming from BASIC, Pascal, MODULA2, C, C++, Java and derived runtime languages, it's pretty weird. It certainly lacked the kind of IDE experience that I hoped for.
That said, it does do a lot of things that I would like in a language, including focusing on runtime behavior.
I looked at go and tried 2 months ago to find out if it had progressed. But that's one hard language to find. I mean, for a Google engineer, you might come up with a language that is easy to, well, Google? Or are they doing one of these: if you cannot find it we don't want you opinion kind of things? I mean, the C language is easier to Google!
Thank you, I do agree. I was about to write to the authors of Go, but I thought better of it: simply because I cannot see Go go anywhere.
Basically, they do really weird things:
- no exceptions
- half assed immutability concepts
- focus on compile time (compile time? really? yes really!)
- no modularization system (it's like the micro-kernel vs mono-kernel fight all over)
It's got some good ideas that make it interesting for small, fast, secure applications, but not so many that it becomes interesting. I could see technically make some headway for small monolithic kernels. But their market placement is lacking to the point that it is non-existent.
I'm not saying that that would be it, but I would not mind a programming environment where the text files have gone the way of the dodo. With Eclipse we use a rather strong "Clean Up" where missing keywords (e.g. final) are added and statements are reformatted (etc.). Wouldn't it be easier to do without that kind of stuff? What about comparing the differences of two branches (or new code with the head) where the actual semantic changes are compared vs lines of text? What about an environment where you can easily hide complexity and meta-information? Or, possibly, add new literals? Where the base of the language is shifted to the Abstract Syntax Tree, not so much the syntax.
Slashdot Mirror
As long as they don't kill the whale while retrieving that, I'm all for it.
You forgot a few:
- easy to solder on board [nope]
- wear leveling [nope]
- possibility to do TRIM [nope]
- encryption? [nope]
And in RAID:
- boot (in RAID) [nope]
- no drivers needed (in RAID) [nope]
- cheaper than the proposed solution (in RAID) [nope]
- smaller than the proposed solution (in RAID) [nope]
- less than 15 needed for sufficient speeds [nope]
Informative? Guy says that micro SD exists and could compete with this product? This is not the same product at all.
But you can already do those with USB based flash components. The added write leveling and speed of an SSD is not really needed for those applications. Of course, that does not matter if the price is right, but I suspect that that might not be the case.
It may be a lot cheaper, but it will also be a lot slower, smaller and most importantly, it will probably not do write leveling in the way higher end SSD's do. You may not need that for your NAS, but other builders should be aware of this fact.
These drives could indeed flourish in the (cheaper) netbook / NAS / internet appliance / TV-as-PC / tablet market and possibly the high end smart phone market as well. My Android just had a 70 MB upgrade to 2.1 and it took quite a long time for it to download and reboot. I'm betting part of that is the flash on the device. Especially netbooks are just made for SSD's. 2.5" drives currently have just one advantage over these kind of SSD's: capacity. All the other things are fully in the SSD camp. It's a shame that the first netbooks came with a rather sub-par flash drive.
That's a double negative, it should read: "you have a right to be offended".
Wait, because he does not like Obama is a reason to discredit the rest of his statement where he does agree with Obama? What's wrong with that?
Yes, but this one seems to be easy to manufacture. The biggest manufacturing problem with the keyboard is probably the protection of the screen underneath, and the focus on the keys itself. Obviously, it would have been better looking if they used the Apple style kind of keys instead of the normal large black ones found on most other keyboards. But other than that, this seems to be a cheap touch sensitive LCD with a keyboard on top.
As for the use, I am not sure that a normal (widescreen) LCD is the way to go. I'm even more sure that I would hate the light emission from the screen. Maybe they should include a method of turning the back light on and off - e.g. when touch typing is detected or when no keys are hit, turn everything off. The problem with many innovations like this is that researchers are too focused on the new technology to let it blend in well.
The read speed and random IO is very good compared to HDD's and older SSD designs. Intel SSD's have not made too much progress lately and have been taken over left & right regarding raw data speeds. That said, I truly love my Intel SSD and there are more important things than raw data speeds.
I haven't seen a single student drag his desktop to college, so I presume you can drop the "supposedly" from the sentence above. Laptop have overtaken desktops a long time ago in sales, even outside of college (where laptops make much more sense).
My next "desktop" probably is a laptop with the capability of dual screens...with SSD, high amounts of RAM and external hard drives (and -in my case - no need for a very high end graphics card) there simply is little reason not to go for a laptop. Keeping two computers is a pain too.
"...but it'd be interesting to see what those numbers are for college students as compared to the outside world."
You lock up your students over there? What a disgrace!
I've lost quite a few people in my lifetime, and personally I would not want to know anything more than what I shared with them while they were alive. And unless there are certain enigma's tearing apart a family or something similar, I would highly recommend to not dig too deep. Remember the people like they were during their lifetime, not some image you get when you start digging into their writings.
You collect stuff when you are alive because you think that you or somebody else might take a look at it at some point in the future. That future does not necessarily include the period after the collector died.
If your post was insightful then this post must be a revelation to the mods out there today.
"How can we be sure all those digits are correct?"
Manual comparison. They read the first million or so digits aloud, and if those digits don't match the ones from previous programs then there is something wrong in the algorithm.
"And, more important question, what are they for?"
Comparison of size of course, people do that all the time. But in this case it's more about who is able to write the most optimal application than anything else.
Ehm, ONE copper connection? Give Joe Sixpack a wire that actually has to run back to the computer and he will certainly hang himself with it, never mind that eye. Or do you want to connect all devices to the radiator of the central heating system?
I guess that if there are faster interfaces then there are faster interfaces. But it is like saying hard drives are better than SSD because of size or cost per gigabyte. This interface can use (a probably cheap) long / strong thin & flexible cable. That alone should make such a thing interesting. Think HD-TV on the other side of the room for instance. This cable should easily fit under the carpet or something like that.
That Intel has been so present minded to be able to interleave different protocols. I still have a grey box (queue: painted black) under my desk and I would love a single cable to the monitors and such on top of the desk. If the monitors could be extended to support daisy chaining and eSATA on top of the USB/card reader, I'm all for it. Of course, you could do the same thing with electrical wiring, but for now Intel seems to be the only one to think this out well.
Yeah, well, a friend of mine did that too, and after a while the inside of his car was completely messed up because some homeless person had slept (and probably everything else) in it. Don't do this while you are parked in a city.
That's great during winter time!
You are just comparing hardware Try comparing software as well. Most enterprise PC's have many things added to it like network drives with Word templates (or even your "profile"), virus scanners etc. Maybe it is trying to see if there is an update of the software on the LAN. Or maybe it's just other versions of Windows/Office. This is why you cannot do simple comparisons like these anymore, computers are just to complex for that.
Very funny. Also funny is the result of the following Google search:
http://www.google.com/webhp?hl=xx-elmer#hl=xx-elmer&source=hp&q=common+lisp+ide&btnG=Google+Seawch&fp=f3bb6faf627dcb6f
First result:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/232486/best-common-lisp-ide
I did the search in a lisping language too, to humor you.
Smalltalk is a very very interesting programming language from a technical point of view. After having tried the language and especially the "living objects" kind of runtime systems, I'm not so sure if the actual implementation of it all is practical.
Smalltalk certainly takes a lot of getting used to. After having it tried only a few evenings, I still haven't fully made up my mind about it. Coming from BASIC, Pascal, MODULA2, C, C++, Java and derived runtime languages, it's pretty weird. It certainly lacked the kind of IDE experience that I hoped for.
That said, it does do a lot of things that I would like in a language, including focusing on runtime behavior.
I looked at go and tried 2 months ago to find out if it had progressed. But that's one hard language to find. I mean, for a Google engineer, you might come up with a language that is easy to, well, Google? Or are they doing one of these: if you cannot find it we don't want you opinion kind of things? I mean, the C language is easier to Google!
Thank you, I do agree. I was about to write to the authors of Go, but I thought better of it: simply because I cannot see Go go anywhere.
Basically, they do really weird things:
- no exceptions
- half assed immutability concepts
- focus on compile time (compile time? really? yes really!)
- no modularization system (it's like the micro-kernel vs mono-kernel fight all over)
It's got some good ideas that make it interesting for small, fast, secure applications, but not so many that it becomes interesting. I could see technically make some headway for small monolithic kernels. But their market placement is lacking to the point that it is non-existent.
I'm not saying that that would be it, but I would not mind a programming environment where the text files have gone the way of the dodo. With Eclipse we use a rather strong "Clean Up" where missing keywords (e.g. final) are added and statements are reformatted (etc.). Wouldn't it be easier to do without that kind of stuff? What about comparing the differences of two branches (or new code with the head) where the actual semantic changes are compared vs lines of text? What about an environment where you can easily hide complexity and meta-information? Or, possibly, add new literals? Where the base of the language is shifted to the Abstract Syntax Tree, not so much the syntax.
Akin Kin.