The fact that during heavy data transfer the CPU is loaded far more heavilly with USB than with firewire.
Yeah, but you're paying for that -- your firewire link has a dedicated controller that handles the transfer, while USB is offloaded to the CPU. One could build a dedicated USB controller and reduce the CPU usage, but then the price would go up accordingly. Would it be worth it? For most of us, it wouldn't.
So why are they making USB 3.0?... If USB works for low end devices now why add more complexity.
There is no point to high bandwidth USB because it is by design not suited for high bandwidth.
Well, you answered your own question. USB 2.0 isn't great for high-speed devices but is great for low-speed ones. So, enter USB 3.0 -- keep the current advantages and bring the bandwidth up so that it works better with high-speed.
Wow... I actually have a Denon receiver and considered them a great brand... A boneheaded product like this puts them in the same category as Monster. There's no way I'm ever going to buy or recommend another Denon product -- how can I possibly trust them?
I was looking for a generic corporate email address to write them an email, but I couldn't find one on their web site... Does anyone have one?
The new "awesome bar" doesn't really support that, though. Yeah, if you type in the whole keyword it'll go there, but nothing shows up while you're typing it, so it doesn't really work with the new bar concept...
But hey, you just go ahead and keep blaming those Eeeevil Big Oil Execs and their OBSCENE 4% profits! Ignorance like yours must be fucking bliss.
Geez, talk about ignorance... Those gross margins of over 40% certainly back your argument that the oil companies are hardly making any money. The fact that only 4% of the gas price goes to the gas seller speaks nothing of the profits made for digging out the crude oil and selling it for ridiculous prices. Evil or not, they are making profits at a rate that many other companies would like to... You certainly shouldn't be feeling sorry for them.
I'm not up-to-speed on hardware, so I found it interesting to see.
But the editors should be up-to-speed. This way, they are misleading you into thinking that this is state-of-the-art technology, and are basically mis-informing you (or, trying to pitch an inferior product for other reasons).
I would also like a story about a new Dell server offering or somesuch.
I'm all for stories about new server offerings, but don't show me a server that's not at least one of faster, cheaper, more powerful, or cooler looking than the competition! Wouldn't you expect that, too, from a nerd news site?
Very insightful -- not. I like this story, for one. I don't believe Taco selling out.
What do you like about it? It's not a particularly interesting article, and the product being showed off is not particularly advanced, cool, or really, not much of anything compared to other similar products. I mean, you can get 8GB flash drives that are smaller than that, and the size and capacity are the only thing going for this product.
Really, either the editor doesn't know what's top of the line these days, or Slashdot's getting paid to insert product advertisements as stories. Not being much of a conspiracy theorist myself, I believe it's the former. Nevertheless, it still makes it a bad "story" to post.
So you're saying that one agent's self-interest is to push the asking price as low as possible, and the other's self-interest is to push the offered price as high as possible. That sounds like conflicting interests requiring negotiation that will wind up with a price in the middle that everyone accepts, which is exactly what you want.
That's not at all what he way saying... He was saying that they will both be looking to sell as quickly as possible and have no interest in getting the best deal for their clients. He used the price to show why..
Wow. I've been sitting here for five minutes rereading this post -- while doing other things -- and I can't get it out of my head. I can't imagine something better than being paid to read Wikipedia and learn stuff all day long for months at a time. That's basically a MacArthur grant. I'd learn Icelandic, finish my PIC data acquisition unit, re-learn synthetic organic chemistry, design and build a couple power supplies, actually learn electrical engineering rather than just pretending to know it, build a suit of chainmail, learn enough aerodynamics to design a new set of wings for a homebuilt plane... I could spend three years of 8 hour days online with ease, and love every second of it.
I can second the parent you're replying to, I know how he felt exactly... See, the thing is, you can't do all of those things while at work. You can surf the web all day long, but you can't build a power supply, a suit of chainmail, test your home-built plane, etc.. You can read and read and read, but you can't really *do* much. I mean, once you start testing planes in your cube, this "grant" of yours is going to end pretty quickly.
Same thing with a monitor. If you are using an old CRT, ok sure the Integrated video is probably fine. However if you have a new professional LCD, maybe it is worth the money to buy a graphics card that properly supports it (for example has enough RAM to run at native rez and has a DVI port).
I get your audio argument, but that doesn't really fly with graphics. Integrated graphics don't have any problems driving large LCDs, and some even have HDMI on top of DVI outputs. That particular chipset easily beats a bunch of discrete video cards on the market, and you won't notice any difference between it and a high-end video card in most cases, no matter what monitor you use. In the audio world, you will always notice the difference between on-board and discrete audio, if you use a good pair of headphones.
I just kind of assumed it'd be able to do fullscreen video at 1920x1080, but it is very choppy. Something to consider when looking for an HTPC.
That's the whole "point" of AMD780 -- it's the first one that can do it, and do it very well. It has built-in video decoders to handle even the most demanding blueray DVDs. On top of actually being able to play most new games, and pretty much all new DX10 games when you add a $50 video card and run them together.
So, yes -- beware of onboard video, but only before this one:).
This is especially true since the processors are their big market. I mean I could see Intel doing it with some other market, like say NICs, that is a small part of their business.
It's exactly what they were doing when AMD was dominating the desktop and 1P/2P server performance with Athlon. They were giving big customers huge rebates on their desktop and 1P/2P server chips to keep AMD from gaining market share, while raking in the profits on the mobile and 4P+ server chip sales since they were still dominating there. They were still profitable, while making AMD's life difficult.
It's also not true that they were still making tons of money. If you look at their gross margins, they severely declined over the last few years because of this competition with AMD.
Ask yourself - would you let a typical graphic designer manage those Ethernet servers, etc. that you currently maintain on your network? No! It works both ways.
That's not a valid argument. To take it to an extreme, you'd never let a chef do brain surgery on you, but you might let a brain surgeon cook you a meal with some help from a cookbook. Just because one profession has little chance of succeeding in another, the opposite does not have to be true.
If the design requirements are small, a capable geek can read some books, look at some design ideas, and probably come up with something worthwhile for a small business web site.
Not so long as the consoles continue to sell at the current price. Sony charges what they think people are willing to pay, no more and no less.
That's a very simplistic view. First, "people" is a collection of persons all willing to pay different prices. So, there's no one price at which "people" will buy, and another at which "people" won't buy.
A company selling a product will try to maximize the profits. Once the cost of production goes down, the "maximum profit" formula changes -- you will either get more profit per unit, or you will sell at the same profit but sell more... or do something in between. The new magic "maximum profit" price will almost certainly be different than before.
Power = Current * Voltage To reduce power consumption, you either have to reduce the voltage or the current.
While your formula is right, it's not too applicable for chip power usage because current is not a constant. The formula you will normally see is
P = P-switching + P-leakage
Now, P-switching = fCV^2, so you can reduce it by reducing the clock frequency, voltage, or the number of transistors. But, P-leakage actually increases exponentially as the gate threshold voltage is reduced -- so, reducing the voltage too much will not help, either. There's only so far you can go before leakage power becomes the dominant one and reducing voltage further doesn't help.
Can someone explain to me the real differences in these candidates? I've been following the primaries and I still can't find one issue where they actually differ.
Policy wise, these are the differences as I understand them:
Health care: - Clinton wants universal health care, and if you don't buy into it they'll penalize you - Obama wants cheaper health care, so everyone can afford it -- but if you can't, tough luck
Iraq war: - Clinton was for it to begin with, but didn't expect Bush to screw it up so badly - Obama thought it was a bad idea, Sadam wasn't so bad, leave the guy alone
Illegal immigration: - I couldn't figure out what the hell Clinton wants, she always goes into a long speech about middle class American families when asked about this - Obama wants to let kids of illegals attend school, and give illegals driver's licenses
Violent games: - Clinton thinks Jack Thompson is right - Obama thinks parents should worry about what their kids play, as long as the games don't implement bubble sort
That's about it, from what I've seen. But, it seems that most people will end up voting based on some intangibles, like charisma, ideals, inspiration, etc...
I can't blame them, I'd vote for Obama for those reasons, too. Too bad I'm Canadian, so I just get to watch them duke it out on TV:).
MS offered 60% more than what Yahoo was worth, Yahoos stock skyrocketed. The FTC might forbid the deal (for example because of Zimbra vs Exchange) or MS __MIGHT__ drop the offer... this would lead to panic stock-selling which COULD ruin yahoo (one competitor less for MS...)
That's not how stock markets work. You can't ruin a company by offering more and then retracting the offer. The "panic-selling" would bring the stock price back to around where it was before the offer, there's no reason at all for anybody to sell below that price just because the merger isn't happening.
It could "ruin" some investors that bought Yahoo after the offer, but that's about it.
but this meta tag does nothing to solve the problem of idiots deciding that it renders in IE so its good enough for everyone.
True. But Firefox is solving that problem by gaining so much market penetration. When a site doesn't work in Firefox, I go somewhere else. When 20-30% of your customers/visitors do the same, they will notice...
The situation is already dramatically better now than it was a couple of years ago. I very rarely run into any sites these days that don't render properly in Firefox, and they are usually some little moms and pops online stores or a personal blog.
In fact many vaccines like smallpox and polio actually spread much more disease than they ever cured.
I'd love to see some references on this. I fail to see how a vaccine itself could possibly spread the disease!
Maybe somebody would go for a swim in a malaria-infested swamp because he thought he was vaccinating against it, while he really got a polio vaccine. So, in effect, polio vaccine helped spread malaria, but I think those cases are few and far between:).
I considered adding some extra little sentence just to prevent such a predictable response but decided I'm tired of doing "pre-emptive strikes" against the obvious.
It's a fallacy in your argument, so if you saw it in advance, you should've reconsidered your point. It is very important to point out why those notices on labels exist, because those motives are what causes the manufacturers to put them up in the first place.
There are only so many things you can force everybody to put on the label.. If you mandate that they disclose "cloned" origins of the food, will you mandate that they disclose the name of the town the food was packaged in, the contents of the food the cow was fed before the milk was extracted, the method of extraction, the type of cow...? You could write a book about each item in the grocery store, but is all that information relevant?
So, what FDA does is that they force the manufacturers to put the important information on the labels, and leaves the rest up to them (which brings us to the original point about the motives). Now, maybe you don't agree on what is important and what is not, but that's what FDA is there for -- to make the decisions for the whole country based on the information they have. Like it or not, that's the system we have.
Everyone else will do what they have always done and ignore the standards completely.
Anybody know looks and their logs and sees 20-30% of visitors using Firefox will not "do what they have always done". They are probably writing standard code for Firefox already, and adding hacks for IE6. Now, then can just add one tag (call it a hack if you will), and the standard code will work with both Firefox and IE8. It makes their lives easier, and therefore they will probably end up writing standard code from now on.
I think this is a good thing. You can't really expect every page out there to be updated to standard code, but you can at least encourage that all *new* code is standard. I think that's good enough, considering the pickle we're in at the moment.
That would make a hell of a lot of pages render poorly by default -- some of them long abandoned, yet still providing useful information. This seems like a good compromise that doesn't break any existing pages... yet it still encourages standards-compliance, because with this tag, you can write once for both IE8 and Firefox and have it work in both.
Stan
Re:This gives reddit a bad name
on
RIAA Website Hacked
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Reddit only reported it, much as how Slashdot would have reported it. No where in the story does it say that Reddit hacked it, no more so then if FOX or CNN reports a murder did they murder that person.
How's that the same? Reddit didn't report that the site was hacked, they reported that it can be hacked and how, and then somebody hacked it.
Organic products are labeled as such because you're willing to pay more for them -- it's only sensible marketing to use that fact, but there's nothing forcing an organic product to be labeled as such. Similarly, meat from "non-cloned" sources will probably be labeled as "clone-free" to earn them the extra dollar.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but you're paying for that -- your firewire link has a dedicated controller that handles the transfer, while USB is offloaded to the CPU. One could build a dedicated USB controller and reduce the CPU usage, but then the price would go up accordingly. Would it be worth it? For most of us, it wouldn't.
Well, you answered your own question. USB 2.0 isn't great for high-speed devices but is great for low-speed ones. So, enter USB 3.0 -- keep the current advantages and bring the bandwidth up so that it works better with high-speed.
Wow... I actually have a Denon receiver and considered them a great brand... A boneheaded product like this puts them in the same category as Monster. There's no way I'm ever going to buy or recommend another Denon product -- how can I possibly trust them?
I was looking for a generic corporate email address to write them an email, but I couldn't find one on their web site... Does anyone have one?
The new "awesome bar" doesn't really support that, though. Yeah, if you type in the whole keyword it'll go there, but nothing shows up while you're typing it, so it doesn't really work with the new bar concept...
Geez, talk about ignorance... Those gross margins of over 40% certainly back your argument that the oil companies are hardly making any money. The fact that only 4% of the gas price goes to the gas seller speaks nothing of the profits made for digging out the crude oil and selling it for ridiculous prices. Evil or not, they are making profits at a rate that many other companies would like to... You certainly shouldn't be feeling sorry for them.
But the editors should be up-to-speed. This way, they are misleading you into thinking that this is state-of-the-art technology, and are basically mis-informing you (or, trying to pitch an inferior product for other reasons).
I'm all for stories about new server offerings, but don't show me a server that's not at least one of faster, cheaper, more powerful, or cooler looking than the competition! Wouldn't you expect that, too, from a nerd news site?
What do you like about it? It's not a particularly interesting article, and the product being showed off is not particularly advanced, cool, or really, not much of anything compared to other similar products. I mean, you can get 8GB flash drives that are smaller than that, and the size and capacity are the only thing going for this product.
Really, either the editor doesn't know what's top of the line these days, or Slashdot's getting paid to insert product advertisements as stories. Not being much of a conspiracy theorist myself, I believe it's the former. Nevertheless, it still makes it a bad "story" to post.
So you're saying that one agent's self-interest is to push the asking price as low as possible, and the other's self-interest is to push the offered price as high as possible. That sounds like conflicting interests requiring negotiation that will wind up with a price in the middle that everyone accepts, which is exactly what you want.
That's not at all what he way saying... He was saying that they will both be looking to sell as quickly as possible and have no interest in getting the best deal for their clients. He used the price to show why..
I can second the parent you're replying to, I know how he felt exactly... See, the thing is, you can't do all of those things while at work. You can surf the web all day long, but you can't build a power supply, a suit of chainmail, test your home-built plane, etc.. You can read and read and read, but you can't really *do* much. I mean, once you start testing planes in your cube, this "grant" of yours is going to end pretty quickly.
Same thing with a monitor. If you are using an old CRT, ok sure the Integrated video is probably fine. However if you have a new professional LCD, maybe it is worth the money to buy a graphics card that properly supports it (for example has enough RAM to run at native rez and has a DVI port).
I get your audio argument, but that doesn't really fly with graphics. Integrated graphics don't have any problems driving large LCDs, and some even have HDMI on top of DVI outputs. That particular chipset easily beats a bunch of discrete video cards on the market, and you won't notice any difference between it and a high-end video card in most cases, no matter what monitor you use. In the audio world, you will always notice the difference between on-board and discrete audio, if you use a good pair of headphones.
I just kind of assumed it'd be able to do fullscreen video at 1920x1080, but it is very choppy. Something to consider when looking for an HTPC.
:).
That's the whole "point" of AMD780 -- it's the first one that can do it, and do it very well. It has built-in video decoders to handle even the most demanding blueray DVDs. On top of actually being able to play most new games, and pretty much all new DX10 games when you add a $50 video card and run them together.
So, yes -- beware of onboard video, but only before this one
This is especially true since the processors are their big market. I mean I could see Intel doing it with some other market, like say NICs, that is a small part of their business.
It's exactly what they were doing when AMD was dominating the desktop and 1P/2P server performance with Athlon. They were giving big customers huge rebates on their desktop and 1P/2P server chips to keep AMD from gaining market share, while raking in the profits on the mobile and 4P+ server chip sales since they were still dominating there. They were still profitable, while making AMD's life difficult.
It's also not true that they were still making tons of money. If you look at their gross margins, they severely declined over the last few years because of this competition with AMD.
Ask yourself - would you let a typical graphic designer manage those Ethernet servers, etc. that you currently maintain on your network? No! It works both ways.
That's not a valid argument. To take it to an extreme, you'd never let a chef do brain surgery on you, but you might let a brain surgeon cook you a meal with some help from a cookbook. Just because one profession has little chance of succeeding in another, the opposite does not have to be true.
If the design requirements are small, a capable geek can read some books, look at some design ideas, and probably come up with something worthwhile for a small business web site.
Not so long as the consoles continue to sell at the current price. Sony charges what they think people are willing to pay, no more and no less.
That's a very simplistic view. First, "people" is a collection of persons all willing to pay different prices. So, there's no one price at which "people" will buy, and another at which "people" won't buy.
A company selling a product will try to maximize the profits. Once the cost of production goes down, the "maximum profit" formula changes -- you will either get more profit per unit, or you will sell at the same profit but sell more... or do something in between. The new magic "maximum profit" price will almost certainly be different than before.
Power = Current * Voltage
To reduce power consumption, you either have to reduce the voltage or the current.
While your formula is right, it's not too applicable for chip power usage because current is not a constant. The formula you will normally see is
P = P-switching + P-leakage
Now, P-switching = fCV^2, so you can reduce it by reducing the clock frequency, voltage, or the number of transistors. But, P-leakage actually increases exponentially as the gate threshold voltage is reduced -- so, reducing the voltage too much will not help, either. There's only so far you can go before leakage power becomes the dominant one and reducing voltage further doesn't help.
Can someone explain to me the real differences in these candidates? I've been following the primaries and I still can't find one issue where they actually differ.
:).
Policy wise, these are the differences as I understand them:
Health care:
- Clinton wants universal health care, and if you don't buy into it they'll penalize you
- Obama wants cheaper health care, so everyone can afford it -- but if you can't, tough luck
Iraq war:
- Clinton was for it to begin with, but didn't expect Bush to screw it up so badly
- Obama thought it was a bad idea, Sadam wasn't so bad, leave the guy alone
Illegal immigration:
- I couldn't figure out what the hell Clinton wants, she always goes into a long speech about middle class American families when asked about this
- Obama wants to let kids of illegals attend school, and give illegals driver's licenses
Violent games:
- Clinton thinks Jack Thompson is right
- Obama thinks parents should worry about what their kids play, as long as the games don't implement bubble sort
That's about it, from what I've seen. But, it seems that most people will end up voting based on some intangibles, like charisma, ideals, inspiration, etc...
I can't blame them, I'd vote for Obama for those reasons, too. Too bad I'm Canadian, so I just get to watch them duke it out on TV
MS offered 60% more than what Yahoo was worth, Yahoos stock skyrocketed. The FTC might forbid the deal (for example because of Zimbra vs Exchange) or MS __MIGHT__ drop the offer... this would lead to panic stock-selling which COULD ruin yahoo (one competitor less for MS...)
That's not how stock markets work. You can't ruin a company by offering more and then retracting the offer. The "panic-selling" would bring the stock price back to around where it was before the offer, there's no reason at all for anybody to sell below that price just because the merger isn't happening.
It could "ruin" some investors that bought Yahoo after the offer, but that's about it.
but this meta tag does nothing to solve the problem of idiots deciding that it renders in IE so its good enough for everyone.
True. But Firefox is solving that problem by gaining so much market penetration. When a site doesn't work in Firefox, I go somewhere else. When 20-30% of your customers/visitors do the same, they will notice...
The situation is already dramatically better now than it was a couple of years ago. I very rarely run into any sites these days that don't render properly in Firefox, and they are usually some little moms and pops online stores or a personal blog.
Anybody know looks and their logs..
That was supposed to be:
Anybody who looks at their logs...
I amaze myself sometimes.
In fact many vaccines like smallpox and polio actually spread much more disease than they ever cured.
:).
I'd love to see some references on this. I fail to see how a vaccine itself could possibly spread the disease!
Maybe somebody would go for a swim in a malaria-infested swamp because he thought he was vaccinating against it, while he really got a polio vaccine. So, in effect, polio vaccine helped spread malaria, but I think those cases are few and far between
I considered adding some extra little sentence just to prevent such a predictable response but decided I'm tired of doing "pre-emptive strikes" against the obvious.
It's a fallacy in your argument, so if you saw it in advance, you should've reconsidered your point. It is very important to point out why those notices on labels exist, because those motives are what causes the manufacturers to put them up in the first place.
There are only so many things you can force everybody to put on the label.. If you mandate that they disclose "cloned" origins of the food, will you mandate that they disclose the name of the town the food was packaged in, the contents of the food the cow was fed before the milk was extracted, the method of extraction, the type of cow...? You could write a book about each item in the grocery store, but is all that information relevant?
So, what FDA does is that they force the manufacturers to put the important information on the labels, and leaves the rest up to them (which brings us to the original point about the motives). Now, maybe you don't agree on what is important and what is not, but that's what FDA is there for -- to make the decisions for the whole country based on the information they have. Like it or not, that's the system we have.
Everyone else will do what they have always done and ignore the standards completely.
Anybody know looks and their logs and sees 20-30% of visitors using Firefox will not "do what they have always done". They are probably writing standard code for Firefox already, and adding hacks for IE6. Now, then can just add one tag (call it a hack if you will), and the standard code will work with both Firefox and IE8. It makes their lives easier, and therefore they will probably end up writing standard code from now on.
I think this is a good thing. You can't really expect every page out there to be updated to standard code, but you can at least encourage that all *new* code is standard. I think that's good enough, considering the pickle we're in at the moment.
That would make a hell of a lot of pages render poorly by default -- some of them long abandoned, yet still providing useful information. This seems like a good compromise that doesn't break any existing pages... yet it still encourages standards-compliance, because with this tag, you can write once for both IE8 and Firefox and have it work in both.
Stan
Reddit only reported it, much as how Slashdot would have reported it. No where in the story does it say that Reddit hacked it, no more so then if FOX or CNN reports a murder did they murder that person.
How's that the same? Reddit didn't report that the site was hacked, they reported that it can be hacked and how, and then somebody hacked it.
just as organic products are labelled as such
Organic products are labeled as such because you're willing to pay more for them -- it's only sensible marketing to use that fact, but there's nothing forcing an organic product to be labeled as such. Similarly, meat from "non-cloned" sources will probably be labeled as "clone-free" to earn them the extra dollar.