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


Forgot your password?

Submission HDMI announces premium certification program for HDMI 2.0->

UnknowingFool writes: HDMI® Licensing LLC announced the new Premium HDMI Cable Certification Program which will certify whether cables can meet the 2.0 specification. While today's HDMI 1.4 cables can handle 4K (4096 x 2160) video, it is at 24Hz or 30Hz for the UltraHD (3840×2160) resolution. HDMI 2.0 cables should be able to handle 4K at 60Hz with 18 Gbit/s throughput and support for HDR video. HDMI 1.4 can handle 10.2 Gbit/s. No word on how many first-born children Monster will charge for 2.0 cables.
Link to Original Source

Comment Re: ROT13 in the WW-II era.. (Score 1) 65

Yes and no. The Poles broke the commercial version of Enigma as these machines had been sold to businesses like banks that needed to secure their communications. This version had only 3 rotors. By the time Germany invaded Poland, they had started using a modified form which used 3 out of 5 rotors and a plugboard for the Luftwaffe and Army versions. The Naval version used 3 out 8 rotors and a plugboard and later in the war added a 4 rotor. These modifications greatly increased the encryption and while the Polish work was helpful, the daily and message settings for the machine was the main puzzle that the British had to solve.

I seem to remember that in the movie, Turing based the "bombe" after the Polish design which could break the commercial version and that it was the Poles that smuggled out a machine to the Allies. Both of these are true.

Comment Re:Samsung != Apple (Score 1) 133

No he didn't and you missed the point. I questioned whether or not his example is actually a fabrication. As for your example, it is the only case that that Apple has done whereas many, many Samsung models barely are updated as it is also up to the carrier. In relevance to this story some US carriers have not updated S4. I do however find it curious that someone so anti-Apple would ever purchase an iPhone.

Comment Re:Samsung != Apple (Score 1) 133

I had a 3 Gen iPod Touch 'go out of support' for new iOS versions less than a year after I bought it. I shouldn't be penalized that way for buying an Apple product late in the period when it is being foisted off on the market as 'current.' Incidentally that iPod is probably the last Apple hardware I will ever buy. There were two iPods that I bought before it.

Let's look at your claim: You had a iPod Touch 3rd gen. It was released Sept 9, 2009 and discontinued Sept 1, 2010 when the iPod Touch 4th gen was released. It started out with iOS 3.1.1 (July 2009) and could be updated to 5.1.1 (May 2012). For only one year was your model "current". The OS was updated for almost 2 years after it was discontinued. I'd have to say your claim is shakyt. For your claim to make sense you would have to buy it after May 2011 in which the current model would be the 4th gen.

Comment Re:My experience with Infosys (Score 1) 348

If your contract is for 12 DBAs or 12 Java programmers, then I'd expect that on day 1, all your personnel are trained/have experience in whatever the contract says. In my experience, only 1 of 12 had the skills that they contract required. Whereas our company actually had the personnel with the skills that the contract required. Sure some of our people had differing amounts of experience (5-10 years vs 2-3 years) but everyone had their certifications and some experience.

Comment Re:Antitrust... (Score 1) 222

Refusing to sell a competitor's product in order to push their own is anti-competitive. After all, Microsoft was just packaging the browser with the OS; that's even more innocuous, isn't it?

If that's all they were doing, there wouldn't be much of a problem. But people forget all the other tactics that MS did. Against Netscape, MS specifically told OEMs that they would raise their license fees with them if they installed Netscape browsers. OEMs on thin margins couldn't afford it even though it helped their customers. Against, Sun's Java they hinted to Intel that if Intel released a JVM optimized for Intel x86 architecture, MS would "favor" AMD in their next version of Windows.

Compare this to Amazon: They are not going to sell competitor's products which they are under no obligation to sell. If Amazon interfered with Apple or Google selling to others then you might have more of an argument.

Comment Re:My experience with Infosys (Score 1) 348

I didn't deal with the negotiations but was told we offered our old rate but was turned down. So the client was focused more on the bottom line than productivity/effectiveness. It may also have hindered them to get the Infosys contract in many ways; it's hard to justify to upper management that you need more money for a contract when you paid so little in the past for the same contract from a different vendor.

Comment My experience with Infosys (Score 5, Interesting) 348

Here's my experience with Infosys: Their tactic is to always be the lowest bidder. When they get the contract, the staff they send generally is untrained with many of them learning the skills they need on the job on the client's dime. We had a contract with a client and were replaced by Infosys. So we had to hand over all of our functions to them; it was apparent that only one person in a team of 12 had the skills to do the job. After a year, the client fired them and came to us. But they wanted Infosys rates; we declined.

Comment Re:Antitrust... (Score 1) 222

Having a monopoly wasn't the problem of Microsoft. It was abusing their monopoly against competitors namely Sun and Netscape through a number of tactics including interfering with their business relationships with 3rd parties. In this case, Amazon is simply refusing to sell a competitor's product. It is loss of sales for them but not anywhere near what MS did.

Comment Re:Unauthorized teardown (Score 1) 366

Well, in hindsight I imagine that I'd feel pretty dumb giving a piece of hardware intended to give developers a head start on producing software to a company best known for dismantling hardware...

I suppose Apple expected people will live up to their word.

But as for giving a competitor a head start... that doesn't matter much to me, and I doubt it matters much to Apple.

You don't think the same company that is suing Samsung would care about secrecy? This is Apple we are talking about, right? Jobs is no longer in charge but secrecy is still part of who they are.

Ideas are easy. Bringing an idea to market is the hard part. Apple's use of these NDA's (partcularly after the already announced the product) are more about controlling the marketing message around a product than about preventing competitors from seeing what they're doing.

I don't know for sure if the hardware in the AppleTV will be the final hardware. For example, Apple can release a different version of the A8 chip. There is some useful information a competitor in such changes.

Wherever you go...There you are. - Buckaroo Banzai