No the skepticism should be the default for any time someone makes a claim. If a US contractor said they reached Mach 12 with an airplane, I would be skeptical because as far as I know only NASA's experimental aircraft have only hit Mach 9.6. The X-43 however did not take off on its own power as many of the NASA's hypersonic planes had to carried to altitude then dropped. Now if you looked at the article, their "plane" was put on top of a rocket. Rockets like Arian 5 can go up to Mach 30 so . . yeah. JWST was launched using an Ariane 5 rocket. Could the US claim the world's first Mach 30 telescope?

Battery life, usage, and the average consumer. We are getting to the point that most consumers do not use the full capabilities of the phone CPU as the CPUs get more powerful. Using A series chips could probably extend the battery life 12 hours or more. Now this is a bad idea for the higher end models where users need the computing power. On the entry level laptops where they are basically tablets with keyboards, it might be okay for that usage.

Because progress is not always singular to your definition of it. From my perspective phone/tablet CPUs are getting powerful enough for the average person to replace their laptops. One reason to use the A series is longer battery life if the user does not need the capabilities of a M chip. Currently M chip laptops can get 18-24 hours on a charge. A series chips might extend that to 36 hours or more.

And you missed his whole point. After you deduct the revenue PC makers get for loading crapware, they get way less revenue and way less profit. His point is that some PC makers may not make any profit without crapware.

The very first thing you did was ignore my point about documentation earlier in this thread: "I can count the number of the times where work was delayed because the requirements were specified verbally and no one wrote them down."

I do not believe anything you guarantee. That solves that matter, does it not?

You said: " then problems are best solved and designs generated when everyone is together in a room with a white board." You said that. Not me. That is not true FOR EVERYONE. Not everyone works the same. You are not everyone. You seem not to understand this point.

seriously IT let you just backup critical files out of the corporate environment? wow now that is an enterprise that is cyber cluster fuck waiting to happen.

I guess the jokes on Snap given the vision pro flop

My compiles do not cost the company millions of dollars per compile. Also there is no threat of anyone dying due to explosion when my compile does not work. Why in the world would you equivocate a compile attempt with a an exploding rocket as if they were exactly the same thing?

In your world. Not in everyone's world. The part you seem to ignore is that now you are relying on people's memory about important details unless you write down what happened like in a summary email or other documentation.

Bahahahahaha. Have you actually worked for a serious company? Meetings happen all the time. Sometimes key people are not available for every meeting. Should things be documented? Yes. In things called emails. You seem to still insist that work can ONLY be done in meetings. According to you.

The problem I have is your insistence that every thing must be done in person. That is not necessarily true. Things can be discussed over email, zooms, phone calls, messages, etc. I can count the number of the times where work was delayed because the requirements were specified verbally and no one wrote them down. And then a game of telephone happens when multiple people disagree on key requirements and deadlines. There were no emails, no texts: just everyone insisting that everyone agreed on their interpretation of what happened in a meeting.

It should be part of the written specifications as sometimes—hear me out on this—not everyone who works on the project can be present at a meeting. For example if they join the team later. My company is cheap and refuses to pay for a Time Machine so people can attend a meeting in the past.

The complaint was not that some people work better when physically located near team members. The complaint was Musk insisted that people work in open offices specifically or they cannot work for him.

So you would rather rely on people’s memory of verbal communications instead of relying on records of written communications? That seems more ripe for failure. However, part of every engineering project I have been a part is the insistence on written documentation for things like specifications. There are procedures for things like requests, changes, approvals, etc. These systems are now electronic so a piece of paper does not need to be located in a specific filing cabinet. That can be done remotely.

We are not whining. We are warning people not to automatically believe ambitious promises that such efforts are easy. Here on slashdot, some people are already promoting Starship on how it can deliver 100 ton payloads cheaper than anyone else. The word "can" has not been demonstrated yet.

Er. No. People at SpaceX did. People seem to forget: Musk is not an engineer. He has limited understanding of the engineering. He just likes taking credit for the work his people do.

It was what Stockton Rush said when people told him carbon fiber was a bad material for his deep sea submersible. He sure showed them!