Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth (Score 3, Informative) 607

by adisakp (#43965947) Attached to: Apple Shows Off New iOS 7, Mac OS X At WWDC

missing the point how are the TB chips linked to the chip set? and does each controller have it's own X4 link?

The TB 2.0 chipsets use a x4 PCIe 2.0 link per controller. Guess that means that each pair of two TB ports shares the bandwidth of a controller (6 ports / 3 controllers / 12 PCIe 2.0 lanes total.

Probably not fast enough for external graphics that would outperform the (extremely fast) internal graphics solution but still orders of magnitude more bandwidth than any current external consumer or prosumer storage solution.

Comment: Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth (Score 5, Informative) 607

by adisakp (#43965479) Attached to: Apple Shows Off New iOS 7, Mac OS X At WWDC

The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth it's only pci-e X4 and I hope that each port or has it's own X4 link or at least one X4 link for 2 ports.

Thunderbolt 2 is 20Gb/s. There are 6 ports and 3 Thunderbolt controllers (each controller handles a full 20Gb/s across 2 ports).

FWIW, PCIe 1.0 x8 is only 16Gb/s and x4 is only 8Gb/s.

The bandwidth here is basically faster than 6 x8 slots.

Comment: Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? (Score 5, Insightful) 607

by adisakp (#43965285) Attached to: Apple Shows Off New iOS 7, Mac OS X At WWDC

I mean really... why?

One thing you should be happy about... putting all the expansion OUTSIDE of the computer using STANDARDIZED interfaces (Thunderbolt was actually developed by Intel and you can get PC adapters) means that any money you put into expanding a computer will be easily portable to other computer or when you upgrade a computer. This isn't necessarily true with internal cards (think ISA / VESA / PCI / PCIe / PCIx). Also, you don't have to worry about upgrading your computer's power supply or cooling when you add expansion.

Comment: Bad Car Analogy (Score 1) 397

by adisakp (#43816017) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: When Is the User Experience Too Good?

Without going into specifics, I believe an apt analogy would be giving everyone in the country a flying car. While this would no doubt be enjoyable, without proper training and regulation it would also be tremendously dangerous (also assume training and regulating is not practical in this case).

In the day of the horse and buggy, many people were against horseless carriages. They were loud, spooked horses on the road, and much more prone to accidents... especially without "proper training and regulation". Yes, imaging how bad things would be if everyone had a horseless carriage.

Comment: Re:Still? (Score 1) 160

by adisakp (#43804253) Attached to: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Offers 2,304 Cores For $650
FWIW, they did the same thing on the PS3. Disabling one of the SPU cores to get higher yields. Even on machines where all the SPU's passed, they still had to disable one though to "standardize" performance... so sometimes functional chips are actually crippled to meet demand for lower specs but it's more often a factor to attain higher yield. Intel did "crippling" on functional Pentiums at first to meet Celeron demand (before actually making a new die for celerons). It's a little bit of both to be honest.

Comment: Caffeine Yes... other perks maybe... (Score 2) 524

by adisakp (#43785155) Attached to: Do Developers Need Free Perks To Thrive?
I have a number of coworkers who basically don't function until their second cup of coffee in the morning. Providing coffee, tea, and soda is a no-brainer for increased productivity.

FWIW, most "free food" programs encourage workers to come in earlier (for breakfast) or stay later (work past dinner time) or to not spend a long time off the company property over lunch. The extra time at work usually pays for the food costs. When we have "crunch time" and are working late, my company orders food for people putting in extra hours. It's probably cheaper than overtime as well.

Comment: Re:Did they break any laws that they wrote? (Score 1) 716

by adisakp (#43783151) Attached to: Web of Tax Shelters Saved Apple Billions, Inquiry Finds

I do not have a problem with them not paying more than they are legally required to, but only to a certain extent. And that extent is when they start pumping money into lobbyists and political donations to KEEP those laws unfairly in their favor. If businesses stay out of politics, then they cannot be blamed when they get advantages from it. But, when they essentially buy our politicians and laws, I have a lot less tolerance for the "I was just following the law" excuse.

Just remember that unlimited donations to provide political advertising or independent political funding from corporations is considered constitutionally protected "free speech" in the US due to the Supreme Court (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission - 2010). And "independent" is a very weak word here. Also in the US, "Corporations are People my friend" remains true even though Romney lost.

Comment: Re:Did they break any laws? (Score 1) 716

by adisakp (#43783081) Attached to: Web of Tax Shelters Saved Apple Billions, Inquiry Finds

Can you please define what "fair share" means?

I think the proposed Buffett Rule does... in which people are required to pay a minimum tax rate based on their income so a billionaire doesn't have a lower rate than his secretary. Since "corporations are people" (according to the Supreme Court), we could apply a Buffet Rule to corporations as well, where they are required to pay a minimum tax rate on their earnings regardless of how many loopholes they have taken advantage of.

Comment: Re:Did they break any laws? (Score 1) 716

by adisakp (#43783033) Attached to: Web of Tax Shelters Saved Apple Billions, Inquiry Finds

If everything legally permissible is deemed morally acceptable then humanity is doomed.

Corporations, as well as the rich, will rarely consider taking advantage of a tax loophole to be "morally wrong". In fact, by the code of corporations, in which maximizing profits for shareholders is one of the prime decrees, to not take advantage of an available loophole would be "morally wrong" to their shareholders.

Therefore, it is up to lawmakers to remove the loopholes. But of course, that will never happen with a Republican House and with Senate Republicans forcing a super-majority 60+ vote on ALL legislation with an ever-present filibuster threat since Obama took office.

Comment: Re:24 yo? (Score 1) 429

by adisakp (#43746853) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Dealing With a Fear of Technological Change?

I've got socks older than you. What are you gonna do when you really get old?

My first published computer program came out YEARS before he was born and I continue to learn new things all the time. I've been programming video games professionally since the 80's and full time since 1993. Every few years, I have to learn entire new OS, new hardware for console, direct low level programming on completely unique custom chips, new IDE's or debugging tools, SDK's, TRC's etc... even new computer languages. Often when the next console comes out, anything I've learned in the previous round is "obsolete" and I have to start over.

But learning and embracing change is a way of life for a good developer. Heck, when I first started programming C wasn't even a certified language. I taught it to myself. Then C++ came our and I taught myself. And template programming and C++11 etc. etc.

In my industry, you have to be driven and constantly researching and teaching yourself new skills. It's good to at least examine some of what is "shiny" to everyone and see what it's about in many fields but in mine it's a matter of survival.

If he's afraid of learning new things now and embracing trends or even disruptive changes, there's no way he'll have a competive skill set in 20 years. If I was stuck on old trends that were around when I started, I'd be programming legacy database code in COBOL and PL1.

When I left you, I was but the pupil. Now, I am the master. - Darth Vader

Working...