Forgot your password?

Comment: Re: Alright smart guy (Score 1) 324

by dgatwood (#47962209) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is iOS 8 a Pig?

I can't imagine why Texas Instruments' lack of support would be relevant in any way unless the phone vendor seriously lacked foresight. Most hardware manufacturers won't ship a closed binary blob that they don't build themselves. They may not be able to make the sources available, and it may be guarded under piles of NDAs so tall that the falling tower of paper would kill anyone who tried to leak it, but that doesn't mean they don't have the sources. I can't imagine that even Samsung would put themselves in such a vulnerable position.

Then again, if Samsung really doesn't care much about long-term support, maybe they would.


Comment: Re:Alright smart guy (Score 1) 324

by dgatwood (#47962169) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is iOS 8 a Pig?

Backups make no difference. GP is correct. A backup of an iOS device includes only user data and apps, not the OS itself, because it is always more reliable to install the OS from a known-good source, and you wouldn't want those bits getting overwritten by corrupted versions from a backup.

And as I understand it, iTunes won't sign the firmware for your device unless Apple says it should. And Apple stops letting it do so shortly after the next OS comes out. Therefore, short of a jailbreak and some sort of forced downgrade from within iOS itself, it is not possible to reinstall a non-current version of iOS even if you've kept the old IPSW file (except on older devices where no newer version is available).

Comment: Re:Alright smart guy (Score 1) 324

by dgatwood (#47962117) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Is iOS 8 a Pig?

Go take a look at which devices support "mavericks" and come back and post your findings.
HINT: Many Mac Pro users were unhappy with the "line" at "2008 and newer"

The list for Mavericks was identical to the list for Mountain Lion. They were mad a year earlier than that.

The way Apple determines support tends to be based upon hardware functionality. Mountain Lion dropped the 32-bit kernel, which means only systems with a 64-bit EFI could run it. Of course, for as long as I can remember, folks have been hacking OS X to run on older, unsupported machines—usually by hacking up the installer and replacing the missing drivers and platform experts, IIRC.

In the case of Mountain Lion and later, such a hack would also require writing a custom bootloader, because the 32-bit EFI can't load a 64-bit bootloader, and the Apple-provided 32-bit bootloader can't load a 64-bit kernel. It seems likely that the non-EFI kernels and bootloader used in the Hackintosh community would "just work" in that regard, but I've never tried it.

Either way, I'm pretty sure the discussion was about phone hardware, rather than computers.

+ - The Ruinous Results Of Our Botched Understanding Of 'Science'->

Submitted by Anonymous Coward
An anonymous reader writes "Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry writes at The Week, "If you ask most people what science is, they will give you an answer that looks a lot like Aristotelian "science" — i.e., the exact opposite of what modern science actually is. Capital-S Science is the pursuit of capital-T Truth. And science is something that cannot possibly be understood by mere mortals. It delivers wonders. It has high priests. It has an ideology that must be obeyed. This leads us astray. ... Countless academic disciplines have been wrecked by professors' urges to look "more scientific" by, like a cargo cult, adopting the externals of Baconian science (math, impenetrable jargon, peer-reviewed journals) without the substance and hoping it will produce better knowledge. ... This is how you get people asserting that "science" commands this or that public policy decision, even though with very few exceptions, almost none of the policy options we as a polity have have been tested through experiment (or can be). People think that a study that uses statistical wizardry to show correlations between two things is "scientific" because it uses high school math and was done by someone in a university building, except that, correctly speaking, it is not. ... This is how you get the phenomenon ... thinking science has made God irrelevant, even though, by definition, religion concerns the ultimate causes of things and, again, by definition, science cannot tell you about them. ... It also means that for all our bleating about "science" we live in an astonishingly unscientific and anti-scientific society. We have plenty of anti-science people, but most of our "pro-science" people are really pro-magic (and therefore anti-science). ""
Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Corporations are belong to people = have rights (Score 1) 85

by drinkypoo (#47960971) Attached to: Is Google's Non-Tax Based Public School Funding Cause For Celebration?

Specifically if I invest money in a corporation with certain rights, I have the right to expect to see those rights not tampered with.

Nonsense. Laws are changed all the time. There's no constitutional guarantee to any of those rights, and many of them are based on deliberate misinterpretation of existing laws in any case.

+ - Psychologist's study finds the old adage "Happy Wife, Happy Life" is true->

Submitted by tomhath
tomhath (637240) writes ""When men felt willing to express their anger or frustration, women took that as a sign that their partners were investing in the relationship, the study found. For most women studied, this translated into a sense of security or happiness for the women.

Men, by contrast, commonly expressed more fulfillment after their female partners expressed to them that they were fulfilled and satisfied in their relationships.

While the study, published in the Journal of Family Psychology, ultimately found that happiness stems from a willingness to try and understand whatever emotion one’s partner is feeling, men tend to disengage when negatively aroused, while women tend to engage and want to discuss the problem.""

Link to Original Source

Comment: Re:Manufacturing (Score 1) 369

by drinkypoo (#47958357) Attached to: Why You Can't Manufacture Like Apple

I think you have no idea what you are talking about. Drilling one hole with a laser isn't too hard. Drilling millions of holes with tight tolerances with near perfect repeatability IS as difficult as "rocket science". (as if that is some sort of valid comparison...) That's exactly what make manufacturing hard.

No, he's right. The benefit of laser cutting is that it is predictable and repeatable. It's far easier to laser-cut millions of holes with tight tolerances with near perfect repeatability with a laser cutter than it is to do it with a mill, provided that the surface being cut lends itself to laser cutting. The problem of positioning the laser is no more complex than the problem of positioning the part on a mill (arguably, it is less so) while milling the holes adds a significant number of additional complexities which are not present in a laser cutting system. That's why laser cutting has become so popular, to say nothing of its ability to handle materials which cannot practically be machined. Then again, laser cutting a fat billet isn't really practical either, so clearly both approaches have their benefits. I imagine that's why both approaches are used by Apple on the same hardware.

Comment: Re:This is why you outsource manufacturing. (Score 1) 369

by drinkypoo (#47958307) Attached to: Why You Can't Manufacture Like Apple

Outsource to a big company like Foxconn or Solectron that has already invested in all the expensive equipment and processes (in both cases, some of it actually paid for by Apple), and have them do your manufacturing for you.

The problem with that notion is that you can and will be pushed aside if Apple wants to do a bunch of manufacturing right now. You are last in line for the big guys. You need to be matched with the appropriate manufacturer.

Comment: Re:Dont forget! (Score 1) 369

by drinkypoo (#47958295) Attached to: Why You Can't Manufacture Like Apple

I wonder if some kind of fair trade system could be developed for electronics, just like we have for food products?

The simplest fix is to charge a tariff to offset the benefits of cheap labor. Then you get money and eliminate the benefits of slavery, without actually outlawing trade. In order to prove that you're unfairly assessing these tariffs, they have to prove that they're not oppressing their people, so the process drives transparency.

It won't fix the low value of human life in China overnight, but it will apply pressure in the correct direction. Sadly, it's not even on the radar.

Comment: Re:It is doable. (Score 1) 369

by drinkypoo (#47958281) Attached to: Why You Can't Manufacture Like Apple

Until you get really sick or run off to Argentina with Miffy, and then the remaining staff hasn't a clue about how to run or fix all the custom contraptions.

The complexity of equipment we're talking about here is nothing like software development. You do realize that even machine tools only have a handful of moving parts, right? Tools which hold animals (or cut, smash, or otherwise affect them) can be apprehended simply by dissasembling them. Then you measure some distances center to center, and maybe the bore and stroke of some cylinders, and do some simple math (as in, even I can do it, and I have issues with numbers) and et voila, you know how it works. Especially if they have more than one of them, and replacement parts can be copied from another machine. Farm equipment is regularly repaired by people who don't have a manual.

Comment: Re:"compared to consumer grade cameras" (Score 1) 48

Because in order for me to give a shit, I have to be able to afford it. Otherwise, I really don't care. I can, however, muster enthusiasm for open-source cameras with the quality of video provided by an expensive DSLR, but cheaper, and still able to use their lenses. If someone can point me to something like that, I'll be excited.

Round Numbers are always false. -- Samuel Johnson