Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:Competition is good. (Score 1) 198

by phayes (#47796961) Attached to: Battle of the Heavy Lift Rockets

While I agree in large part, that little has changed in physics over the last 60 years, there is the one wrinkle of the soviet accomplishment in perfecting oxidizer rich engines as in the RD-180s. It took a lot of work finding materials that would stand up to high temp + high pressure oxygen and they deserve more praise than they got from the achievement.

Comment: Re: What for? (Score 1) 191

by phayes (#47689025) Attached to: Reversible Type-C USB Connector Ready For Production

Therein lies the the problem. You are a zealot, unable to move from your unverified preconception of USB as well designed, are unable to give a single concrete example of a USB connector which doesn't snap and see any criticism of USB or of your unsupported defense of same as "noise".

Blather indeed, how dare anyone actually doubt the holy church of USB as anything less than perfect. Yet another case of "none are so blind as those who refuse to see"...

Comment: Re: What for? (Score 1) 191

by phayes (#47675709) Attached to: Reversible Type-C USB Connector Ready For Production

Right, Mr GM ignition switch controller/USB zealot. Your sole experience of a connector that snapped because it was low end trumps my description of dozens of devices with three different but related USB failure modes. You welsh out on giving an example of a correctly engineered device because, even though you can't admit it, you know deep down that there is a problem with the weak center post in every USB design.

Post by post, it's becoming clear that all three: sour grapes, willful ignorance & intellectual dishonesty apply to your defence of USB.

Comment: Re: What for? (Score 1) 191

by phayes (#47672981) Attached to: Reversible Type-C USB Connector Ready For Production

I's either sour grapes, willful ignorance or intellectual dishonesty. Your choice, but sour grapes is the least pejorative IMO.

You've made the ludicrous clam that because you can hang your phone upside down from its cable USB is well designed.

Then you falsely claim that only shoddy connectors break the center post, delaminate or rip the female sockets off the PCB & gloss over the fact that these happen to all USB sockets, no matter what their claimed quality is. Come on, lets hear who exactly manufactured in what device one can find your supposedly flawless USB connectors. Given how many different phone & device manufacturers are in the dead USB box, I'm confident that I'll have a few. What then, hmmm? I suspect an attempt to move the goalposts claiming that "oh, but some other device has better connectors" like many other USB zealots I've encountered.

I do not have a box of low end dead USB devices. indeed most of them are/were high end when they were purchased.

You wouldn't mind if the USB committee would clamp down on the "shoddy" manufacturers? WAKE UP! It's NOT REPEAT, NOT spelled N O T just the low end. These problems happen to ALL USB devices! Not frequently, no, but it shouldn't be happening at all!

Up to now you have avoided acknowledging at all that Thunderbolt is a superior connector. A thought strikes me: Do you work on ignition switches for General Motors?

Yes, part of the reason that Thunderbolt is a better connector is because Apple's specifications are more rigorous. How good of you to take over 30 hours to at last agree with the the closing sentence of my first post in this thread. Now explain how that fragile center post does NOT make USB a worse specification/connector than Thunderbolt.

Comment: Re: What for? (Score 1) 191

by phayes (#47669315) Attached to: Reversible Type-C USB Connector Ready For Production

I see sour grapes because I clearly stated that it is the design of USB on my post of 2014-08-13 20:39 where I said:

we have a box full of telephones and other USB devices at work with that supposedly well designed invulnerable center post snapped off or the contacts delaminated off it & bent into uselessness. Yeah, of course, it must be because we must be using shoddy devices insufficient to deal with our superhuman strength. Damn that yellow Sun...

Or, just maybe, designing that fragile central post into the standard and allowing cheap & shoddy connectors is the problem. Not a problem with the (better designed IMO) Thunderbolt connectors.

Yet in your reply of 2014-08-13 20:39 you attempt to imply that my experience & everyone else who has bricked USB devices is because that I'm using shoddy implementations :

The design is fine, the construction is shoddy.

In my reply of 2014-08-14 3:21 I insist that it isn't just me or your putative shoddy construction. I've seen the center post snapped off/contacts delaminated/connecter ripped off the PCB on just about every make & model of phone that our company uses. No devices (other than Type B in my experience) are immune to USB's weaknesses. It's not rare to see Type-As are snapped off of PCs when they are turned in for renewal & USB charting stations in airports seem to be dying out in Europe because ports are broken so often.

Hey, maybe Apples patents are what is preventing the USB committee from using a better design. I don't know. That shouldn't stop you from acknowledging that Thunderbolt has a superior design & implementation when:
- Thunderbolt's female port doesn't have that fragile center post which snaps off
- Thunderbolt's female port contacts cannot delaminate from the central post & bend back.
- Thunderbolt's female ports cannot be merely soldered to the PCB, there HAS to be strain relief or it isn't Thunderbolt.
- Thunderbolt is more expensive than USB. (but the previous 3 points all brick devices so it's stupid to skimp here)
- Thunderbolt's uselessly reversible (But now that USB is going to a reversible connector too I suppose the die hard USB cheerleaders are going to drop this one).
- It's Apple's design.
- Apple won't let you use it.

When the only reasons are the last two, the problem is jealousy: Thus sour grapes.

Comment: Re: What for? (Score 1) 191

by phayes (#47667831) Attached to: Reversible Type-C USB Connector Ready For Production

Yeah, yeah, heard it before. If anyone calls into question the USB committee's weak designs, say it's because they must be using shoddy connectors, whereas your "well made" connectors don't have a problem. USB design isn't "fine" as you put it, it's demonstratably poorer than thunderbolt. Repeating the USB mantra "We put the parts that wear out in the connector so you don't damage the socket" doesn't make it true. The dozens of cellphones & other now useless devices that come from Blackberry, Samsung HTC, etc that all say that their USB sockets are well made yet snap the center post or delaminate the contacts or separate from the PCB tell me that that position is a load of crap.

Thunderbolt doesn't use a hollow male connector made of plastic with inward facing contacts and a thin wrapping strip of metal like USB. The male Thunderbolt connector is a solid injection moulded slab with the contacts on the outside.

Thunderbolt female connectors don't have a fragile central plastic post that often breaks but Apple did render obligatory the strain relief that the USB committee left off. If the female socket doesn't have strain relief, it's not Thunderbolt.

Thunderbolt's solid connector is thus mechanically much more robust, but not to the point where the male connector is stronger than the female socket.

Apple's design is clearly superior but through sour grapes many, like you, refuse to see.

Comment: Re: What for? (Score 1) 191

by phayes (#47664809) Attached to: Reversible Type-C USB Connector Ready For Production

So people say, and yet we have a box full of telephones and other USB devices at work with that supposedly well designed invulnerable center post snapped off or the contacts delaminated off it & bent into uselessness. Yeah, of course, it must be because we must be using shoddy devices insufficient to deal with our superhuman strength. Damn that yellow Sun...

Or, just maybe, designing that fragile central post into the standard and allowing cheap & shoddy connectors is the problem. Not a problem with the (better designed IMO) Thunderbolt connectors.

Comment: Re: What for? (Score 1) 191

by phayes (#47661625) Attached to: Reversible Type-C USB Connector Ready For Production

Unfortunately, that's not true as every USB adapter has a design where the contacts are facing inwards towards an isolated post which can & does snap off. On USB type-B connectors the post is thick enough so that I've never seen anyone do it but on Type-A's and much more commonly all the newer smaller connectors it's the most common failure mode after poor strain relief that often rips the connector off the PCB.

Apple's design of lightning without this fragile post and more rigorous specification that the female ports must be screwed (& not just soldered) to the PCB makes it a clearly superior solution.

Comment: Re:The problem of Microsoft (Score 3, Insightful) 337

by phayes (#47645669) Attached to: Microsoft Surface Drowning?

I doubt there are that many people outside of the stereotypical Slashdot demographic who view Microsoft the way you are describing them.

Clearly you are not talking to the people who are paying the Microsoft tax. Microsoft's repeated licensing changes which have made it ever more expensive to be correctly licensed have made them no friends and many enemies. These are NOT the generic slashdot crowd, they are the people who look at the year over year increases in licensing wondering why they have to pay more for the same services. MS's bundling of supplementary services -- which they neither want nor need doesn't justify the increases for them.

Comment: Re:The canonical best household router is (Score 2) 427

by phayes (#47636345) Attached to: Ask Slashdot: Life Beyond the WRT54G Series?

When asking around for my WRT54G, not once I got advise that the only router matching the stability is the Apple AirPort.

Then you need to change the people you are asking or at least enlarge it to people beyond those who's biggest joy is hacking access points.

They are more expensive, comparatively limited in function - but whatever traffic you throw at it, however long, just like the WRT54G, it simply handles it without outages.

All true, and the kicker when using a recent airport versus an old WRT is that the airports are just better access points with more range than the WRT54GLs that they replaced in our household. While I had a lot of fun playing with DD-WRT & tomato & other firmware I got tired of low bandwidth in some parts of my home. I'd replaced the WRTs at a relative's house with airports because their configuration is simple enough for them to preform by themselves & I was impressed by how much better the coverage was enough to do the same in my home.

I've moved all the ancilliary duties the WRTs performed to a mac mini & now with the airports I have great coverage everywhere.

It is impossible to travel faster than light, and certainly not desirable, as one's hat keeps blowing off. -- Woody Allen

Working...