I got the warranty info directly from WD's site and spec sheets. RPM is NOT the primary factor in determining seek time, that only affects rotational latency, which is one of at least 4 components of access time, the other three being track seek time, head settling time, and head select time. Seek time is generally the largest of those, rotational latency second largest, and the others are minor by comparison.
Amount of ECC is not only dependent upon 512/4k (AF) drive, that's one factor, but most "enterprise" drives from most manufacturers have greater ECC and most use lower track densities to allow faster positioning (faster seek). For instance, compare the data sheets for the 7200RPM desktop and Enterprise (Constellation ES) drives from Seagate. Note the "enhanced error correction" and better "non-recoverable read error" rates (which are directly related to ECC recoverablity) on the ES (enterprise) drive, and that's comparing a 512b sector ES drive to a 4K/AF desktop drive.
As I said, you analysis was generally good, you just missed a the 3 items I noted.
1. Both of the specific drives you mentioned above have 5 yr warranties, so your specific example doesn't work for costs, but in general, your analysis is valid.
2. You don't address performance differences. WD doesn't specify seek times on these, so I can't compare them. But in general, "Enterprise" drives have faster seek and/or transfer rates. This may make the enterprise drive superior for certain environments.
One final difference, many/most "enterprise" drives have higher levels of error correction, so even if the drive failure rate is the same, they're more likely to be able to read/recover data from a given sector.
While one designer was common to both, USB as far more in common with Apple Desktop Bus (ADB) than with SIO. ADB supported hot plugging, dynamic device driver loading, same power specifications as USB 1.1, simple cabling, very low cost, etc. ADB was much slower than USB (even low-speed), but it's design has more in common with USB than does SIO, even though it's from a completely different group of designers. SIO might be the grandfather design, with ADB more of a parent or uncle.
GP is correct, this isn't a "net neutrality" issue. It's a class of service issue. They offered a service with terms that you can't run your own server for a specific amount of money. The don't limit what devices you connect, what sites you access, what protocols you can run, etc. They don't give priority to their own services, or limit access to competitors, etc. You bought "consumer" access, not "provider" access, and the terms say you can't operate a publicly accessible server. If you want to operate a server and be a provider, get the correct type of account. That's not "net neutrality", it's a contractual issue.
In China, workers don't need unions, they just need to be an Apple supplier, and get China Labor Watch to give them a poor report on workplace conditions. Then, the world will force Apple to force the supplier to address the issues (or hide them better).
Maybe, the user didn't want to confuse you by sending in multiple problem reports at once. Or maybe the user's manager thought that would overload IT, or make it appear they were just complaining too much.:)
I had users who just ignored, or worked around errors, errors that had never been reported. Some were user errors (resolved by both program changes to prevent those errors and user training), some were UI errors that didn't impact the results, and some were program errors with actual consequences or impact on the data or utility of the software. I found out about these errors by watching the users, or as a side issue when they were having some other problem that they did report. I explained that reporting all errors ASAP gives the developers a broader view of the potential problem, and allows all errors to be fixed faster and more completely. I trained them to report every problem, no matter how small, and made a point of addressing those errors as quickly as practical to reinforce the behavior of reporting them. And, of course, I explained that unreported errors were very unlikely to be fixed, ever.
BEAL'S CONJECTURE: If Ax + By = Cz, where A, B, C, x, y and z are positive integers and x, y and z are all greater than 2, then A, B and C must have a common prime factor
Fermat's Last Theorem is a subset problem, where x=y=z, Since FLT has been proven (that no such solution exists), then we can say that:
- x, y, and z must all be greater than 2 (as specified in the original conjecture)
- and x, y, and z cannot all be equal (because then FLT would be wrong)
Even if A,B,C,X,Y and Z are prime, they all have a common factor of one. Does one not count?
From the link in the sumary: BEAL'S CONJECTURE: If Ax + By = Cz, where A, B, C, x, y and z are positive integers and x, y and z are all greater than 2, then A, B and C must have a common prime factor
Well, you apparently don't read very well. Inhaled radiation is definitely more dangerous. However, ingested radiation depends upon the type of radiation emitted and the specific element. Ingested uranium or plutonium will pass right through the body without being absorbed, so the exposure is very time limited. We ingest radioactive potassium every single day, in fact, our lives depend upon it, and >99% of all potassium on earth is radioactive.
Processes are patentable. Ideas aren't, but a specific idea that is implemented as a process may be patentable. It's still not the software that is being patented, it's the implementation of a specific method/process, not the math involved.
Claiming that software is just math, therefore, nothing written is software can be patented is an absurd claim. All machines are "just engineering" in their implementation, and engineering is just math, therefore, no object would ever be patentable using that absurd logic.
There must be sufficient time for a fully loaded semi-trailer to react to the change, and safely come to a stop, or proceed through the intersection, from at least 5mph under to 5mph over the posted speed limit, in wet road conditions, or it's not safe. These cities are risking your safety to raise more money from bogus fines.
Exactly. That is what everyone who rails that "software is just math" completely misses. It's not the implementation in software that is eligible for patent protection, it's the idea/process that the software is an implementation of that is eligible for patent protection.
Unfortunately, that's often not true. Some people are still blind in hindsight.
However, he may have actually had an inclination that he decided to ignore and instead make a decision "based on the data he had available"
The problem is that we sometimes look at all the relevant reports, trend studies, and specs we've been presented with and figure that constitutes the data that's available. It's not. I believe that what we often call "gut instinct" or "intuition" is really our mind's way of combining various bits of information from throughout our lifetime and merging it with our sense of the current situation to form an opinion. THAT is data too.
Many techie people seem to be confounded by Apple's success because the just look and the hardware specs and think there's better stuff available. Lot's of folks in the tech industry thought the iPad was going to be a huge flop.
They seem to have a hard time grasping that numbers aren't all that matter and more data needs to be considered. The game changers are often the people who know how to look beyond the numbers.
Well said. Those who look only at the available data will always miss the next trend, because the data isn't yet available. Sometimes, you have to take the risk and trust you intuition/gut.
er, youre saying that the iPad mini is $398 with the keyboard. WHY am i not comparing it to a $380 laptop again?
er, because that's not what the commenter I replied to stated. He compared it to the price of TWO cheap laptops. You should try reading what you're responding to.
If I have to stick in the $200 range, Im gonna get a chromebook, which has about the same functionality as an iPad, and a lot more oomph. Its also cheaper, has a bigger screen, and a far superior keyboard.
It's also significantly larger and heavier, has shorter battery life, and doesn't run nearly as many apps. As I said, if you want/need a laptop, buy a laptop.
iPads have their place, but dont try to claim that theyre faster / cheaper than a laptop.
weight: 3lbs, 2x as heavy as the iPad, 4x the weight of the iPad Mini.
Keyboard: crappy, but don't take my word for it, from the above review... "We've always had mixed feelings about Acer's FineTip keyboards, and this one did not impress. The keys lacked good tactile feedback and springiness, and the keyboard flexed noticeably when we typed. This caused us to make more errors than we usually do. We never got comfortable with the layout,..."
Display: Crappy. again, from the review... "1366 x 768 resolution display has a glossy finish, though it wasn't too reflective under fluorescent lights. Colors are slightly muted, which is unusual for a glossy screen, and even at 100 percent brightness the panel seems slightly dim. Horizontal viewing angles aren't super wide, but three people sitting together should be able to see the screen without encountering color distortion or darkness. While watching an episode of Murder, She Wrote on Netflix, we found that pushing the display past about 25 degrees (when looking at it head-on) made colors look darker and in shadow, so there isn't a wide vertical range, either."
Sound: Again, from the review..."The two small speakers under the Aspire One 722's front lip don't produce very loud volume - we had to turn the notebook up to 100 percent to get decent audio when playing some Adam Lambert tracks."
Camera: 0.3MP (std VGA). From the review..."Colors were more washed out than we like,..."
...and the multi-touch has not been an issue because apps have had to be designed for non-multi-touch sensors in any case.
Exactly the point, the Apps were designed for it from the beginning, because Android supported both from the start. iOS was designed from the start as touch only, so any addition of mouse support either needs OS support for using the mouse to emulate multi-touch gestures, or the apps all have to be updated. It's not a trivial thing either way.
No, that's not the only thing that needs to change. As you noted, multi-touch gestures don't work with a standard mouse (could possibly work with Apple's Magix Mouse or Magic Trackpad). You also need to add a mouse pointer so you can see what you're pointing at, scrolling has to be addressed (there are no scroll bars in most apps), and you have to create suitable replacements for touch&hold. And, while the current iOS method of selecting text could be adapted to using a mouse, that would be a clumsy way to use a mouse compared to how we've learned to select text using a mouse for the last 30 years. Certainly, the multi-touch gestures are the biggest obstacle, but there are other obstacles to address. The point is that it's not a trivial issue, it's one that has some real UI and usability questions to address before supporting a mouse.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean my plans to build an Argon bomb and take over the world aren't going to work?
You'll just have to use 39Ar or 42Ar, and probably need a H-fusion reaction to detonate it.
The fact that argon hydride was found in space implies that krypton, xenon, and radon hydride can also be found in space.
Probably, but since the quantities of those elements will be dramatically lower than argon, detecting them will likely be much more difficult.
I got the warranty info directly from WD's site and spec sheets. RPM is NOT the primary factor in determining seek time, that only affects rotational latency, which is one of at least 4 components of access time, the other three being track seek time, head settling time, and head select time. Seek time is generally the largest of those, rotational latency second largest, and the others are minor by comparison.
Amount of ECC is not only dependent upon 512/4k (AF) drive, that's one factor, but most "enterprise" drives from most manufacturers have greater ECC and most use lower track densities to allow faster positioning (faster seek). For instance, compare the data sheets for the 7200RPM desktop and Enterprise (Constellation ES) drives from Seagate. Note the "enhanced error correction" and better "non-recoverable read error" rates (which are directly related to ECC recoverablity) on the ES (enterprise) drive, and that's comparing a 512b sector ES drive to a 4K/AF desktop drive.
As I said, you analysis was generally good, you just missed a the 3 items I noted.
Good analysis, with two issues:
1. Both of the specific drives you mentioned above have 5 yr warranties, so your specific example doesn't work for costs, but in general, your analysis is valid.
2. You don't address performance differences. WD doesn't specify seek times on these, so I can't compare them. But in general, "Enterprise" drives have faster seek and/or transfer rates. This may make the enterprise drive superior for certain environments.
One final difference, many/most "enterprise" drives have higher levels of error correction, so even if the drive failure rate is the same, they're more likely to be able to read/recover data from a given sector.
"...a good bulk storage array uses spinning rust,..."
I don't allow rust in my storage arrays. Aluminum, magnesium, and glass don't rust.
No, from TFA:
, so the comparison is indeed pointless (more accurately, it's baseless).
While one designer was common to both, USB as far more in common with Apple Desktop Bus (ADB) than with SIO. ADB supported hot plugging, dynamic device driver loading, same power specifications as USB 1.1, simple cabling, very low cost, etc. ADB was much slower than USB (even low-speed), but it's design has more in common with USB than does SIO, even though it's from a completely different group of designers. SIO might be the grandfather design, with ADB more of a parent or uncle.
...where failure is rewarded, as long as you can talk a good game.
...they don't have to worry about anyone stealing them, since there is almost no market for them.
GP is correct, this isn't a "net neutrality" issue. It's a class of service issue. They offered a service with terms that you can't run your own server for a specific amount of money. The don't limit what devices you connect, what sites you access, what protocols you can run, etc. They don't give priority to their own services, or limit access to competitors, etc. You bought "consumer" access, not "provider" access, and the terms say you can't operate a publicly accessible server. If you want to operate a server and be a provider, get the correct type of account. That's not "net neutrality", it's a contractual issue.
In China, workers don't need unions, they just need to be an Apple supplier, and get China Labor Watch to give them a poor report on workplace conditions. Then, the world will force Apple to force the supplier to address the issues (or hide them better).
My Buzzword Bingo card was completed in the first 3 paragraphs of Ballmer's memo. By the end, I only had a few unmarked spaces on each card.
Maybe, the user didn't want to confuse you by sending in multiple problem reports at once. Or maybe the user's manager thought that would overload IT, or make it appear they were just complaining too much. :)
I had users who just ignored, or worked around errors, errors that had never been reported. Some were user errors (resolved by both program changes to prevent those errors and user training), some were UI errors that didn't impact the results, and some were program errors with actual consequences or impact on the data or utility of the software. I found out about these errors by watching the users, or as a side issue when they were having some other problem that they did report. I explained that reporting all errors ASAP gives the developers a broader view of the potential problem, and allows all errors to be fixed faster and more completely. I trained them to report every problem, no matter how small, and made a point of addressing those errors as quickly as practical to reinforce the behavior of reporting them. And, of course, I explained that unreported errors were very unlikely to be fixed, ever.
And the drivers should be happy to work when your system default is A4 paper. Rather than trying to insist on going (back) to Letter.
What? You think there is a world outside North America? Which planet are you from?
BEAL'S CONJECTURE: If Ax + By = Cz, where A, B, C, x, y and z are positive integers and x, y and z are all greater than 2, then A, B and C must have a common prime factor
Fermat's Last Theorem is a subset problem, where x=y=z, Since FLT has been proven (that no such solution exists), then we can say that:
Even if A,B,C,X,Y and Z are prime, they all have a common factor of one. Does one not count?
From the link in the sumary: BEAL'S CONJECTURE: If Ax + By = Cz, where A, B, C, x, y and z are positive integers and x, y and z are all greater than 2, then A, B and C must have a common prime factor
And one is not considered a prime.
Well, you apparently don't read very well. Inhaled radiation is definitely more dangerous. However, ingested radiation depends upon the type of radiation emitted and the specific element. Ingested uranium or plutonium will pass right through the body without being absorbed, so the exposure is very time limited. We ingest radioactive potassium every single day, in fact, our lives depend upon it, and >99% of all potassium on earth is radioactive.
Processes are patentable. Ideas aren't, but a specific idea that is implemented as a process may be patentable. It's still not the software that is being patented, it's the implementation of a specific method/process, not the math involved.
Claiming that software is just math, therefore, nothing written is software can be patented is an absurd claim. All machines are "just engineering" in their implementation, and engineering is just math, therefore, no object would ever be patentable using that absurd logic.
There must be sufficient time for a fully loaded semi-trailer to react to the change, and safely come to a stop, or proceed through the intersection, from at least 5mph under to 5mph over the posted speed limit, in wet road conditions, or it's not safe. These cities are risking your safety to raise more money from bogus fines.
Exactly. That is what everyone who rails that "software is just math" completely misses. It's not the implementation in software that is eligible for patent protection, it's the idea/process that the software is an implementation of that is eligible for patent protection.
I agree that hindsight is 20/20.
Unfortunately, that's often not true. Some people are still blind in hindsight.
However, he may have actually had an inclination that he decided to ignore and instead make a decision "based on the data he had available"
The problem is that we sometimes look at all the relevant reports, trend studies, and specs we've been presented with and figure that constitutes the data that's available. It's not. I believe that what we often call "gut instinct" or "intuition" is really our mind's way of combining various bits of information from throughout our lifetime and merging it with our sense of the current situation to form an opinion. THAT is data too.
Many techie people seem to be confounded by Apple's success because the just look and the hardware specs and think there's better stuff available. Lot's of folks in the tech industry thought the iPad was going to be a huge flop.
They seem to have a hard time grasping that numbers aren't all that matter and more data needs to be considered. The game changers are often the people who know how to look beyond the numbers.
Well said. Those who look only at the available data will always miss the next trend, because the data isn't yet available. Sometimes, you have to take the risk and trust you intuition/gut.
er, youre saying that the iPad mini is $398 with the keyboard. WHY am i not comparing it to a $380 laptop again?
er, because that's not what the commenter I replied to stated. He compared it to the price of TWO cheap laptops. You should try reading what you're responding to.
If I have to stick in the $200 range, Im gonna get a chromebook, which has about the same functionality as an iPad, and a lot more oomph. Its also cheaper, has a bigger screen, and a far superior keyboard.
It's also significantly larger and heavier, has shorter battery life, and doesn't run nearly as many apps. As I said, if you want/need a laptop, buy a laptop.
iPads have their place, but dont try to claim that theyre faster / cheaper than a laptop.
Comprehension fail. I made no such claim.
Well, since you insist...Acer Aspire 722:
...and the multi-touch has not been an issue because apps have had to be designed for non-multi-touch sensors in any case.
Exactly the point, the Apps were designed for it from the beginning, because Android supported both from the start. iOS was designed from the start as touch only, so any addition of mouse support either needs OS support for using the mouse to emulate multi-touch gestures, or the apps all have to be updated. It's not a trivial thing either way.
No, that's not the only thing that needs to change. As you noted, multi-touch gestures don't work with a standard mouse (could possibly work with Apple's Magix Mouse or Magic Trackpad). You also need to add a mouse pointer so you can see what you're pointing at, scrolling has to be addressed (there are no scroll bars in most apps), and you have to create suitable replacements for touch&hold. And, while the current iOS method of selecting text could be adapted to using a mouse, that would be a clumsy way to use a mouse compared to how we've learned to select text using a mouse for the last 30 years. Certainly, the multi-touch gestures are the biggest obstacle, but there are other obstacles to address. The point is that it's not a trivial issue, it's one that has some real UI and usability questions to address before supporting a mouse.