To bad the current war on two fronts are not only unfunded with bonds earmarked for the war effort, but the republican president that started them gave a huge tax break to the wealthy at the same time. This set up the US government to have a huge spike in debt which has gotten us in this mess in the first place.
You think we rode to the moon on civilian hardware? Those were repurposed ICBMs made to blow up cities. The SALT treaties put an end to them.
Cool story bro. Too bad it's completely wrong.
The Saturn series rockets were designed by Von Braun's team to launch military satellites into low earth orbit. Every single one of them was launched from Cape Canaveral. The Saturn V was the largest of the Saturn series and was built for the purpose of launching astronauts into space. NASA never launched astronauts on rockets that were not designed to be human-rated.
The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) treaty (more specifically SALT I) agreement was made in May 1971 which is a little late for the Saturn V to repurposed since it flew from Nov 9, 1967 to Dec 6, 1972.
BTW, ICBM were originally mounted on Atlas rockets then were replaced by the Titan II rockets.
Especially if the long list was for witnesses capable of providing testimony. This way Samsung lawyers are properly notified and Apple wouldn't have any additional procedural hurdles that would otherwise prevent them from calling a witness during the limited time allowed by the judge.
I agree this makes the judge appear unprofessional. Of course, you don't have to be a professional to be a judge.
Off the top of my head we can start with rootkit CDs, locking users out of their PSN accounts and denying them products they've already paid for, removal of the Other OS and poor security.
Is this evil? It looks like S&M between two consenting individuals, since people know about Sony's propensity for heavy handiness and yet they still pay them money for it and seem to find pleasure from it.
The iPhone is not compatible with the frequency allotment given to my carrier's 3G/4G network. They are retiring their 2G service and repurposing that band to HSPA+ which is on a frequency allotment that is compatible with the iPhone.
I didn't mean to give the impression that the iPhone can't work on GSM. But it is basically useless as a wireless data device if it can only access 2G data speed.
You're not getting better signal strength by rebooting, you're rejoining a tower by rebooting. Your signal strength is dropping off over time because your provider has over-subscribed your area in terms of users vs tower capacity. Getting an iPhone won't change this.
Except my daughter's phone and my wife's phone has no problem keeping their signal. Also my signal issues follow me while I travel, I doubt they oversold every single tower that I happen to use.
Actually my carrier has started converting from GSM to HSPA+ which is compatible with the iPhone. As of July, 7% of their market supports the iPhone. They are saying they should have most of their 2G networks retired and reassigned to HSPA+ by Spring of 2013.
Personally, I think the Android handsets vary from 'cheap piece of crap' to 'significantly better than iPhone'. It depends of what criteria you use, I suppose.
Suggest a phone that is 'significantly better' than the iPhone. I know it's not my HTC or my friend's Samsung headset, so is it Motorola?
Strange... everyone I know launches almost all of their applications from there, and on Android, can check the status of multiple accounts, weather, messaging, etc, at a glance. It really does revolve around the home screen. Probably more so in iOS. Having widgets and other ways of customizing it makes it far more usable, I think.
I hardly use the widget versions of the app. It is much easier just to drag down the notification bar and tap on the alert to launch the exchange mail, gmail, Weather Underground etc. Tapping the widget always launched the associate app anyway, so the notification method saves me a step. I can do a similar thing on the iPhone.
Sure I have some App shortcuts on the home screen, but it's not that much different than how I launch apps on the iPad.
So are you saying that Samsung and other android phone manufactures should stop trying to mimic the iPhone and go their own path? That would be great, since there are other features that give an Android phone an edge over the iPhone. Unfortunately good quality handset hardware and seamless OS software upgrades aren't one of them.
That said, it's getting better. I've seen a large percentage of former iPhone users with Galaxy II and II Android phones. All are amazed at how much better it is, mainly in how you can customize the interface.
As a counter-point to your purely ancedotal evidence, count me as one of many Android users who are waiting for their carrier to natively support the iPhone on their 3G+/4G network. I'd much prefer a phone that doesn't require a reboot simply to regain signal strength (I have an HTC) over a customizable interface, which I must admit I can live without. I've been an Android phone owner since the early days of 1.4 and my phone usage has never revolved around the home screen.
No matter the backup solution being proposed there are hardware costs involved. When the backup size reaches 24TB, dedicated backup devices become quite competitive. Especially when you consider that some of these tape drives are designed for autonomous operations with a tape jukebox. Sure the hard drive may be slightly less expensive, but they consume much more electricity and require more cooling than a tape drive. Also if you do purchase one of those jukebox tape drives, you won't have to waste time changing media every time you want to make the backup.
The easier and less time consuming the backup procedure is, the more likely regular backups will be made.
I agree. I have similar data generation and storage requirements. Our science team is spread over two continents and we too use multiple storage locations for our online backup. Having said that, I just had our IT guy install a brand new high capacity tape drive so that we can start archiving the data into long term storage. So the two backup schemes aren't mutually exclusive.
Let's pretend the poster is not an idiot, and answer the actual question. If he has 24TB of data, IT'S ALREADY ON DAS/NAS. Geesh.
Don't assume he was the one that created his current storage solution. It could be a turnkey solution that he purchased, like one of those movie storage devices we read about on slashdot earlier this year.
If he installed his current storage configuration himself then why did he need to ask this question on Slashdot? I don't see any particular bad answers, and no one is insulting him. I'm sure he is mature enough to filter all these responses and pick the right one for his situation.
You don't need a Gigabit connection everywhere, just on your computer and the NAS directly connected to your computer.
USB2 is not a very good option. For some reason, I've been getting poor performance from Linux with storage mounted via USB. Your best bet is eSata. If you can't install eSata, but have a Gigabit eithernet connection then go that route. USB2 is the connection of last resort when talking about backing up 24TB.
As usual the Apple "haters" over simplify the issue and come up with a false premise to satisfy their argument. This is beyond the simple idea of "rounded corners", and this goes beyond the F700.
For all I know Samsung could have been copied the LG Prada (LG is one of Samsung's main competitors) which announced in 2006. I doubt they were copying the iPhone.
While it may be true that is all you know, I believe the case involves more than the Samsung F700, iPhone, and the LG Prada. It based on how Samsung chose to emulate Apple's design instead of continuing with their own design plans. Internal documents seem to confirm this, and their current phone and tablet products do look too much like an iPhone copy.
You muddied the water a little bit. Let me point out that we are talking about smartphones not MP3 players. The review you linked is from 2006, and in it the reviewer complained about inaccurate sensing of the touch controls. This is irrelevant anyway since the Handspring Treo 180g was a touchscreen (albeit with a stylus) mobile phone that was introduced in February 2002.
What is being discussed in the court case is the fact that Samsung chose to duplicate the styling of the iPhone in an attempt to appear like they are just as tech savvy as Apple. The Samsung F700 which was announced one month after the iPhone has an outward appearance of an iPhone yet the UI was very primitive in comparison. Once the iPhone was out on the market, Samsung started to make their products more similar and Samsung's internal documents seem to substantiate that claim.
No one is contesting that Samsung could have come up with their own smartphone. Unfortunately, it appears Samsung chose to copy Apple's efforts instead.
Samsung don't build the iPhone - they only supply a few components chips (cpu, flash) and the LCD display. All of these parts can be purchased in volume, there's absolutely no reason why Apple would need to supply Samsung with pre-release iPhone designs.
This is true. However my main intent was to point out the flaw in the parent's logic "Samsung presented evidence of phones that were in development before the iphone was announced" where he compared the date of announcement with the date that development started.
I also pointed out in a follow up reply, that the Samsung F700 development timeline is being debunked, and the similarity is only with the chassis. Given that Samsung didn't announce their phone until one month after Steve Job's public announcement, I could argue that Samsung got the chassis design from a protective case manufacturer or from the FCC certification documents. These are the same places Apple rumor websites scoured for any details of the iPhone. It's worth mentioning again, that the F700 only looked similar to the iPhone on the outside. The actual UI was primitive and required a sliding keyboard for most input.
I assume you are referring to the Samsung F700 whose development and announcement timeline is currently being debunked by several sites. The F700 wasn't publicly announced until February 7, 2007. The development timeline wasn't disclosed, but there were direct comparisons to the iPhone during the original announcement.
Unfortunately for Samsung, the F700 only copied the look of the chassis and not the UI. The pictures shown on a Gizmodo article dated Feb 8, 2007 shows some screen shots, and they are not even close to the iPhone UI. It looks like Samsung got wind of what the chassis would look like from case manufacturers just like AppleInsider and other Apple rumor sites, and built a smartphone with the exterior looks of the iPhone.
I wouldn't say so. Samsung presented evidence of phones that were in development before the iphone was announced that looked very similar to the iphone.
I'm sure Apple had the iphone under development before it was announced. Samsung being a supplier for the iPhone would have access to these designs during the development stage.
*I* don't have to decide that I want a YouTube app since Google includes in my Android OS, while Apple is allowing their users to decide to download the app from the App store in iOS 6.
Since they can't hide their crappy data service with a handset that makes the consumer not want to use it, they are forced to create artificial barriers to act as a facade for their crappy connectivity.
Wow no sense of humor. To make things worse, you are using DEA's death in the line of duty as an attempt to score some political points within a geek forum. I'd think it would have been more appropriate to talk about how the current administration seems to be kowtowing to the MPAA/RIAA.
Anyway since you did bring it up and you act like Obama authorized the killing of the agent and all investigations of organized crime weapon smuggling are completely safe. I'd like to point out that DEA agents have a dangerous job and we should be thankful that we have people who are willing to endanger themselves to keep the rest of us safe. Sometime miscalculations will be made and people get killed. We need to learn to differentiate the difference between authorizing the program at large, and making decisions out in the field. Time magazine did a very interesting article on the subject, you can google it.
The problem I have with your assertion is that I haven't seen any evidence that another president would have done anything differently. Fast & Furious was started under the Bush administration. This fact doesn't absolve Obama since he reauthorized it but it does show that both party administrations would have continued the program. Obama has the misfortune of (1) a major fuck up happening during his watch and (2) an opposing political party looking to manufacture any scandal possible to discredit his presidency.
Instead of focusing like a laser asking "what if" and pretending that another president would do something different, how about looking at both candidates and asking "who's the better choice overall". The republicans appear to be afraid of this comparison. Which is unfortunate, since I remember a time when a candidate won the election by a landslide with a platform of change and hope. Now we have both candidates campaigning on fear, uncertainty and doubt.
It's bad enough the presidential election is a contest between the lesser of two evils. Don't add false dichotomies to the election rhetoric.
Anyway I find it sad that Obama's opponents are focusing so much on an operation that resulted in a death of one DEA agent. I guess they want to distract us from a previous republican administration decision that killed and maimed thousands of US soldiers, and resulted in large amounts of currency and weapons to be unaccounted for in a hostile country. Sadly the current operations aren't the first time.
While we are on the subject of the supposed outrage from the right, here's some food for thought. The most revered republican president (Reagan) sold weapons to the enemy of the state (Iran) and then tried to cover it up. They were using the proceeds to fund the Nicaraguan Contras. In their attempt to cover up their shenanigans, they shredded countless documents and lied to congress. The central figure of the scandal (Oliver North) was herald as a hero for carrying out the plan and sacrificing his military career to cover it up. The whole scandal landed him a job at Fox news.
My final point being beware of taking one political party's bullshit as gospel.
Slashdot Mirror
To bad the current war on two fronts are not only unfunded with bonds earmarked for the war effort, but the republican president that started them gave a huge tax break to the wealthy at the same time. This set up the US government to have a huge spike in debt which has gotten us in this mess in the first place.
Cool story bro. Too bad it's completely wrong.
The Saturn series rockets were designed by Von Braun's team to launch military satellites into low earth orbit. Every single one of them was launched from Cape Canaveral. The Saturn V was the largest of the Saturn series and was built for the purpose of launching astronauts into space. NASA never launched astronauts on rockets that were not designed to be human-rated.
The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) treaty (more specifically SALT I) agreement was made in May 1971 which is a little late for the Saturn V to repurposed since it flew from Nov 9, 1967 to Dec 6, 1972.
BTW, ICBM were originally mounted on Atlas rockets then were replaced by the Titan II rockets.
Reminds me of 30 rock:
"Science was my most favorite subject, especially the Old Testament." - Kenneth (3.22 Kidney Now!)
Especially if the long list was for witnesses capable of providing testimony. This way Samsung lawyers are properly notified and Apple wouldn't have any additional procedural hurdles that would otherwise prevent them from calling a witness during the limited time allowed by the judge.
I agree this makes the judge appear unprofessional. Of course, you don't have to be a professional to be a judge.
Is this evil? It looks like S&M between two consenting individuals, since people know about Sony's propensity for heavy handiness and yet they still pay them money for it and seem to find pleasure from it.
It's disturbing when you really think about it.
The iPhone is not compatible with the frequency allotment given to my carrier's 3G/4G network. They are retiring their 2G service and repurposing that band to HSPA+ which is on a frequency allotment that is compatible with the iPhone.
I didn't mean to give the impression that the iPhone can't work on GSM. But it is basically useless as a wireless data device if it can only access 2G data speed.
Except my daughter's phone and my wife's phone has no problem keeping their signal. Also my signal issues follow me while I travel, I doubt they oversold every single tower that I happen to use.
Actually my carrier has started converting from GSM to HSPA+ which is compatible with the iPhone. As of July, 7% of their market supports the iPhone. They are saying they should have most of their 2G networks retired and reassigned to HSPA+ by Spring of 2013.
Suggest a phone that is 'significantly better' than the iPhone. I know it's not my HTC or my friend's Samsung headset, so is it Motorola?
I hardly use the widget versions of the app. It is much easier just to drag down the notification bar and tap on the alert to launch the exchange mail, gmail, Weather Underground etc. Tapping the widget always launched the associate app anyway, so the notification method saves me a step. I can do a similar thing on the iPhone.
Sure I have some App shortcuts on the home screen, but it's not that much different than how I launch apps on the iPad.
So are you saying that Samsung and other android phone manufactures should stop trying to mimic the iPhone and go their own path? That would be great, since there are other features that give an Android phone an edge over the iPhone. Unfortunately good quality handset hardware and seamless OS software upgrades aren't one of them.
As a counter-point to your purely ancedotal evidence, count me as one of many Android users who are waiting for their carrier to natively support the iPhone on their 3G+/4G network. I'd much prefer a phone that doesn't require a reboot simply to regain signal strength (I have an HTC) over a customizable interface, which I must admit I can live without. I've been an Android phone owner since the early days of 1.4 and my phone usage has never revolved around the home screen.
No matter the backup solution being proposed there are hardware costs involved. When the backup size reaches 24TB, dedicated backup devices become quite competitive. Especially when you consider that some of these tape drives are designed for autonomous operations with a tape jukebox. Sure the hard drive may be slightly less expensive, but they consume much more electricity and require more cooling than a tape drive. Also if you do purchase one of those jukebox tape drives, you won't have to waste time changing media every time you want to make the backup.
The easier and less time consuming the backup procedure is, the more likely regular backups will be made.
I agree. I have similar data generation and storage requirements. Our science team is spread over two continents and we too use multiple storage locations for our online backup. Having said that, I just had our IT guy install a brand new high capacity tape drive so that we can start archiving the data into long term storage. So the two backup schemes aren't mutually exclusive.
Don't assume he was the one that created his current storage solution. It could be a turnkey solution that he purchased, like one of those movie storage devices we read about on slashdot earlier this year.
If he installed his current storage configuration himself then why did he need to ask this question on Slashdot? I don't see any particular bad answers, and no one is insulting him. I'm sure he is mature enough to filter all these responses and pick the right one for his situation.
You don't need a Gigabit connection everywhere, just on your computer and the NAS directly connected to your computer.
USB2 is not a very good option. For some reason, I've been getting poor performance from Linux with storage mounted via USB. Your best bet is eSata. If you can't install eSata, but have a Gigabit eithernet connection then go that route. USB2 is the connection of last resort when talking about backing up 24TB.
As usual the Apple "haters" over simplify the issue and come up with a false premise to satisfy their argument. This is beyond the simple idea of "rounded corners", and this goes beyond the F700.
While it may be true that is all you know, I believe the case involves more than the Samsung F700, iPhone, and the LG Prada. It based on how Samsung chose to emulate Apple's design instead of continuing with their own design plans. Internal documents seem to confirm this, and their current phone and tablet products do look too much like an iPhone copy.
You muddied the water a little bit. Let me point out that we are talking about smartphones not MP3 players. The review you linked is from 2006, and in it the reviewer complained about inaccurate sensing of the touch controls. This is irrelevant anyway since the Handspring Treo 180g was a touchscreen (albeit with a stylus) mobile phone that was introduced in February 2002.
What is being discussed in the court case is the fact that Samsung chose to duplicate the styling of the iPhone in an attempt to appear like they are just as tech savvy as Apple. The Samsung F700 which was announced one month after the iPhone has an outward appearance of an iPhone yet the UI was very primitive in comparison. Once the iPhone was out on the market, Samsung started to make their products more similar and Samsung's internal documents seem to substantiate that claim.
No one is contesting that Samsung could have come up with their own smartphone. Unfortunately, it appears Samsung chose to copy Apple's efforts instead.
This is true. However my main intent was to point out the flaw in the parent's logic "Samsung presented evidence of phones that were in development before the iphone was announced" where he compared the date of announcement with the date that development started.
I also pointed out in a follow up reply, that the Samsung F700 development timeline is being debunked, and the similarity is only with the chassis. Given that Samsung didn't announce their phone until one month after Steve Job's public announcement, I could argue that Samsung got the chassis design from a protective case manufacturer or from the FCC certification documents. These are the same places Apple rumor websites scoured for any details of the iPhone. It's worth mentioning again, that the F700 only looked similar to the iPhone on the outside. The actual UI was primitive and required a sliding keyboard for most input.
One more thing.
I assume you are referring to the Samsung F700 whose development and announcement timeline is currently being debunked by several sites. The F700 wasn't publicly announced until February 7, 2007. The development timeline wasn't disclosed, but there were direct comparisons to the iPhone during the original announcement.
Unfortunately for Samsung, the F700 only copied the look of the chassis and not the UI. The pictures shown on a Gizmodo article dated Feb 8, 2007 shows some screen shots, and they are not even close to the iPhone UI. It looks like Samsung got wind of what the chassis would look like from case manufacturers just like AppleInsider and other Apple rumor sites, and built a smartphone with the exterior looks of the iPhone.
I'm sure Apple had the iphone under development before it was announced. Samsung being a supplier for the iPhone would have access to these designs during the development stage.
You seemed confused, so I FTFY.
Since they can't hide their crappy data service with a handset that makes the consumer not want to use it, they are forced to create artificial barriers to act as a facade for their crappy connectivity.
Wow no sense of humor. To make things worse, you are using DEA's death in the line of duty as an attempt to score some political points within a geek forum. I'd think it would have been more appropriate to talk about how the current administration seems to be kowtowing to the MPAA/RIAA.
Anyway since you did bring it up and you act like Obama authorized the killing of the agent and all investigations of organized crime weapon smuggling are completely safe. I'd like to point out that DEA agents have a dangerous job and we should be thankful that we have people who are willing to endanger themselves to keep the rest of us safe. Sometime miscalculations will be made and people get killed. We need to learn to differentiate the difference between authorizing the program at large, and making decisions out in the field. Time magazine did a very interesting article on the subject, you can google it.
The problem I have with your assertion is that I haven't seen any evidence that another president would have done anything differently. Fast & Furious was started under the Bush administration. This fact doesn't absolve Obama since he reauthorized it but it does show that both party administrations would have continued the program. Obama has the misfortune of (1) a major fuck up happening during his watch and (2) an opposing political party looking to manufacture any scandal possible to discredit his presidency.
Instead of focusing like a laser asking "what if" and pretending that another president would do something different, how about looking at both candidates and asking "who's the better choice overall". The republicans appear to be afraid of this comparison. Which is unfortunate, since I remember a time when a candidate won the election by a landslide with a platform of change and hope. Now we have both candidates campaigning on fear, uncertainty and doubt.
It's bad enough the presidential election is a contest between the lesser of two evils. Don't add false dichotomies to the election rhetoric.
Anyway I find it sad that Obama's opponents are focusing so much on an operation that resulted in a death of one DEA agent. I guess they want to distract us from a previous republican administration decision that killed and maimed thousands of US soldiers, and resulted in large amounts of currency and weapons to be unaccounted for in a hostile country. Sadly the current operations aren't the first time.
While we are on the subject of the supposed outrage from the right, here's some food for thought. The most revered republican president (Reagan) sold weapons to the enemy of the state (Iran) and then tried to cover it up. They were using the proceeds to fund the Nicaraguan Contras. In their attempt to cover up their shenanigans, they shredded countless documents and lied to congress. The central figure of the scandal (Oliver North) was herald as a hero for carrying out the plan and sacrificing his military career to cover it up. The whole scandal landed him a job at Fox news.
My final point being beware of taking one political party's bullshit as gospel.