Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Last Chance - Get 15% off sitewide on Slashdot Deals with coupon code "BLACKFRIDAY" (some exclusions apply)". ×

Comment Re:Back to the dongle days? (Score 1) 287

The battery in the portable charger you'll need to carry with you to recharge your iPhone when the DAC and amplified in your headphones kills its battery. You could still listen while you charged if you had a 3.5mm jack, but you'll have to unplug those headphones from the lightning connector in order to plug in that battery.

Comment Re: funny and sad (Score 1) 287

That's two components, at least one of which is based on licensed block designs from ARM, who could simply stop licensing them for future use and BAM, no more A series chips can be made. Go on thinking Apple invented everything in the iPhone, really, go ahead, don't let those pesky facts get in the way. Don't get me wrong, I've got a number of apple products and I do love them, but i don't bullshit myself about what Apple actually does as a company. The AC you replied to is absolutely correct.

Comment Re:converter (Score 1) 287

Until it's "No-energy", meaning no power is required for any purpose other than driving the speakers to produce audio, and all of that power comes from the audio source, it's not fixing the problem stated in GP's post. As long as the limiting factor on my listening time is the size of the battery in my bluetooth headset, my bluetooth headset will always play second fiddle to my wired headphones. And I have a couple of really high-end bluetooth headsets that I really love but rarely use for that exact reason. They're great when wires are really a problem, like when laying down to sleep or working on a car, but they're not so great when using them means carrying twice as many battery-powered chargers, for example, on a two week hike.

Comment Re:Ads from yahoo has a bad rep. (Score 1) 323

You come off as an entitled dick with a huge case of unwarranted self importance.

Why? Because I realize that's not how things work and, as a result, avoid putting myself in situations where I might be liable for the misdeeds of others? You see, an entitled dick would go ahead and put himself in that position, then throw a bitch fit when things didn't go his way; again, I simply avoid the situation altogether rather than making unreasonable demands. My previous post is an example of such an unreasonable demand, with the explanation that I avoid putting myself in a position to make said demand by not using the service. Furthermore, an individual with a huge case of unwarranted self importance might be inclined to reply to a post on a public forum, somewhere like Slashdot for example, without reading the entire thing first; this often leads them to take what they have read entirely out of context and say something foolish, as you're done here. Your only saving grace, in that regard, is that you posted anonymously and didn't sign your message, while someone with aforementioned huge case of unwarranted self importance would do at least one of those things.

Comment Re:Ads from yahoo has a bad rep. (Score 1) 323

I figure I've got about a decade of work product on my computer. If my machine gets infected and that gets stolen, is Yahoo! willing to pay me... oh, let's see... 10 years, that's 520 weeks at 40hr/wk (being generous, most weeks are closer to 60 with some topping 80+), at my high-volume billable rate of $50/hr... 520 * 40 * 50 = $1.04 million? Oh, plus a day's work that will be lost to nuke-and-pave, another day to configure all the software I reinstalled the day prior, and another day to restore my backups, so tack another $1200 on there. And if my backups are damaged, tack on another decade of payment to cover my time to redo that work; if those backups simply don't exist, then, instead tack on two weeks of lost work ($4000) while I take the system off my network, go through everything and back up whatever's clean make note of what's not salvageable, a percentage of $1.04 million equal to the percentage of work that must be redone, in addition to the time to restore those backups after nuke-and-pave.

Unless Yahoo! is willing to accept potential liability of up to $2,085,200 (plus court costs, legal fees, and my billable rate for work lost having to sue them over it, let's just bump that number up to $3mil since I won't cheap out on my lawyer), they should allow me access to the email account I already have with them, without requiring me to view their ads, which have a history of carrying malware. At the very least, they should provide a list of alternate providers who don't block users of ad blockers, assistance in migrating to one of those providers, free forwarding from the old address to the new address for at least a year (preferably 5-10) and, if the newly chosen service is not free, cover the cost for that same period. After all, it's not like I can just stop using my Yahoo! mail, there is a fair bit of work involved in doing that and I would need access to my Yahoo! mail (without the ads that have proven to be dangerous) in during that time.

I say would because the real reason I can't just stop using my Yahoo! mail is that I don't use Yahoo! mail, or any other Yahoo! services, on the off chance that one of their potentially malicious ads slips past my ad blocker.

Our informal mission is to improve the love life of operators worldwide. -- Peter Behrendt, president of Exabyte