Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:It's not meant to compete with Arduino (Score 1) 241

by UWC (#36968538) Attached to: .NET Gadgeteer — Microsoft's Arduino Killer?
I know for certain that there are 72MHz ARM chips out there that sleep well below 40mA (I think in the 1mA range). I wonder what keeps this one so hungry while asleep. The NXP 24xx chips have been around for a while, though. They're extremely capable (USB host capabilities and such) but might lag a little behind the most recent speedy embedded ARM chips in terms of efficiency.

Comment: Re:Double Dipping? (Score 1) 315

by UWC (#34435876) Attached to: Time Warner Defends Comcast In Level 3 Dispute
They previously didn't have to pay Level3 because Comcast and Level3 worked out a peering agreement that assumed general parity of inbound versus outbound traffic, and neither one had to pay. Now that Level3 is serving up Netflix content, the traffic Level3 is sending into Comcast's network is much greater than the amount coming out of Comcast onto Level3. They need a new peering agreement, and this one is going to have to address the imbalance in traffic.

Comment: Re:Double Dipping? (Score 1) 315

by UWC (#34434838) Attached to: Time Warner Defends Comcast In Level 3 Dispute
Very very well explained VGPowerlord. I wish I had mod points. Instead, I'm giving you my first comment in some number of years. Use it wisely. Or not. Anyway, your description of Akamai's distributed nature brought it further together for me. Comcast's mistake has been in letting this seem like they're targeting Netflix traffic specifically. If it's a content-agnostic peering agreement they're after (and I hope it is), then it makes total sense. When it seems like they want to make a special fee specifically for Netflix traffic is when it seems anticompetitive.

Sentient plasmoids are a gas.

Working...