Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
For the out-of-band Slashdot experience (mostly headlines), follow us on Twitter, or Facebook. ×

Comment: Re:With an advertisement for RHEL... (Score 1) 133 133

by AK Marc (#50017387) Attached to: How IKEA Patched Shellshock

the man goes full comando and updates everything live without testing.

That's an assumption on your part. Sure, it may be implied, but isn't confirmed. I've seen places large enough that their OS provider would test on their behalf. So he can claim "no testing" and the answer is it was tested. Well tested. I've seen it done before.

Comment: Re:Or (Score 1) 101 101

by AK Marc (#50017273) Attached to: Airplane Coatings Help Recoup Fuel Efficiency Lost To Bug Splatter
Same way as many cars wash their headlights? There are piles of answers to the question. A temporary surface used for takeoff that's retracted after takeoff, removing all the bugs with it.

I can think of 100 ways to solve this, so when people make it sound hard, that just proves they are dumb. Yes, not all are good, and at most one would be optimal, but give me a few million dollars, and I can make more headway.

Comment: Re:How does that compare to desktops? (Score 4, Insightful) 154 154

by AK Marc (#50015861) Attached to: Study Suggests That HUD Tech May Actually Reduce Driving Safety
The problem with this is why the person doing the study is important. If, when you get 10 MPH over the limit, the windshield pops up a huge warning message, that's bad. But having the speed on the view 100% of the time, with the color of the display changing as the limit is reached, and passed, would give the same information and should make you more safe, not less. I could ask the same question and get opposite answers, depending on what I want to find.

The HUD that's augmented reality (overlaying IR on real view, so you see deer sooner and such), that should never be a distraction.

What is in the HUD that's distracting? Everything the ECU knows, displayed in Matrix style? Yes, distracting and not useful. But the tasteful HUDs? If they are distracting and intrusive, that's more a driver problem, not a HUD problem.

Comment: Re:Recharge seems to be bottleneck (Score 1) 123 123

Nope that's the first time for the R5 (the world's thinnest phone, or was last I checked). The other times were for the Find 7 (which I own), which was, at the time of purchase, the highest pixel density of any phone, though others have matched QHD, but in a (smaller) 5.1 screen.

Just because I'm happy with my purchase doesn't mean I'm a shill. Just trying to make the point that you can't judge every smartphone by the iPhone or Samsung de jour. So many complain about a specific flaw in a specific model, then generalize. Yes, thinner can mean weaker, that's why Oppo made a video of the world's thinnest phone cracking nuts, cutting apples and watermelons, and being run over by a car. If you still think that thin means weak, that's your insanity, not reality.

And yes, I watched all the marketing material and read many reviews before buying the Oppo, since I hadn't heard about them until I was looking for a replacement for my S3. The marketing videos seem relevant to the complaints here.

Comment: Re:Good. However.... (Score 1) 123 123

I gave up on Samsung with the S3. Given the claims and the reality, it isn't worth my money to try again after something so por and didn't do what they said. But other Android makers of the day beat the specs and weren't lying about them. But good to hear you have good experience with your S6

Comment: Re:Recharge seems to be bottleneck (Score 1) 123 123

Plus of course, 1.8x at brand new means that all other things being equal, you'll have many fewer charge cycles.

No, it doesn't.

a smaller phone - which isn't really very likely, they're already reaching the limits of what you can do in terms of structural strength

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Hmm, thinner than an iPhone, and they drive a car over it. Though I didn't see a bend test, they seem to be implying it's strong.

Comment: Re:Good. However.... (Score 1) 123 123

Stop using Samsung. My S3 sounds like that. But I switched to Oppo, and there's a world of difference. Put the phone in some reasonable power-savings for a weekend camping trip, and you'll be fine (at least I can do that with my Find 7). But my S3 wouldn't last 8 hours at work without a charge. Even if I never used it once in that time.

Comment: Re:And to think they'll misuse that (Score 1) 123 123

My Oppo Find 7 will run 3 days or so if the screen doesn't come on. That's with cellular on (And in range, I've never had it out of range, but my Samsung Galaxy S3 would last about an hour if you were out of coverage). And it has a fast charger, charge about 1% per minute, so it's usable at 1 hour charge every 2 days. I'm no longer tied to a charger, like my S3 which, even under very light use, couldn't last an 8 hour day without being charged, so it was plugged in nearly 100% of the time.

Comment: Re:well then (Score 1) 123 123

My Oppo Find 7 is better than a friend's iPhone 6 of the same age.

The problem isn't "android" but the phones you are looking at. Target longer lives and you'll find options. My Samsung Galaxy S3 would last less than 30 minutes with a graphical game, or movie playing. I'll never go Samsung again. On the car charger, the GPS with screen off, giving directions would drain faster than it would charge, less than 20 minutes of GPS (off charger, about 30-40 on). If you went somewhere an hour away, you'd have to get close before turning on the directions app, or you'd never make it where you are going. But my current, the Oppo, does much better, even using the same maps/directions app.

Comment: Re:well then (Score 2) 123 123

Remember the size of cell phone batteries back in the day?

Back when they lasted a week on a charge? Yes, they were larger. And lasted longer. Much longer. Of course the phones were lower-draw (though not as low as you'd think, as the radios were more power hungry).

FORTRAN rots the brain. -- John McQuillin

Working...