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


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:I hope Apple knows (Score 1, Insightful) 143


Any new computer hardware on the market these days is plenty powerful enough to handle anything a typical user might ever want to do.

That means that unless you're a power user (or video game or VR enthusiast), there's going to be very little difference between your experiences using a modern low-end vs a modern high-end system; either one will work just fine for you.

So the remaining criterion (other than purchase price) is the quality of the user-experience -- i.e. how much of your time at the computer is spent getting accomplished the things you want to accomplish, and how much is spent dealing with computer problems?

Minimizing the latter is what Mac users are willing to pay extra for.

Comment Re:Legal? (Score 1) 283

A less-contrived example would be when the person cutting the lock is legally authorized to do so. For example, someone leaves the lock (with or without a bicycle) locked to the rail of a handicap-access ramp, or some other place that it isn't allowed to be, and at some point a city employee is tasked to remove the lock. When (s)he does so, (s)he gets gassed. I don't think that would play well from a legal standpoint.

Comment Re:easily made up in peripherals. (Score 1) 524

Speaking as an admin, the number of mac users that request elegant peripherals is not trivial.

No doubt, but a business is allowed to say 'no' to those requests, if it feels it's not worth the money to buy the elegant peripherals.

I imagine a lot of businesses probably don't care though, since compared to their ongoing salary costs, the cost of an occasional frou-frou trackpad is rounding error. If a one-time $80 purchase makes a $3000/week employee happier and/or more productive, why not?

Comment Re:Were the users randomized? (Score 1) 524

Tried that. It didn't work because the technically inept parent still had just as much problem with the Apple product. It turns out that you can't idiot proof something.

Sometimes you gotta up the dose. If a Mac isn't simple enough, switch them to an iPad. If they can't handle the iPad, then there's no hope, you'll need to migrate them back to pen-and-paper.

Comment Re:Were the users randomized? (Score 1) 524

it's a hidden cost that is virtually impossible to tally on a spreadsheet: your productivity is lost while you fix that problem. Did it take you an hour, where a tech might have taken 10 minutes?

Not really an issue at my employer, where the IT department will always take at least 48 hours to respond, followed by an additional 8 hours to diagnose, only to conclude that my Mac "must have come down with a virus" and recommend that I reinstall Windows on it.

(only mostly kidding)

Comment Re: Ignores the issue (Score 1) 116

Why would the Clinton campaign risk doing anything now, when they're already cruising towards a landslide victory? Trump did a fantastic job of disqualifying himself at the debates; now all they have to do is run out he clock. To try some "October surprise" at this point would gain them very little, but if it went wrong somehow it could hurt them greatly.

Comment Under what circumstances would a user notice? (Score 2) 159

Are there situations where a user would notice a slower flash write speed on their cell phone?

The only time I can think of where a phone would need to write massive amounts to flash is during an OS upgrade (which is hopefully a rare thing) -- even during an app install, the user is likely to be bounded by their network's download speed, not by the speed of writing to flash. Similarly, while recording live video, the phone only needs to write at the bandwidth of the video stream, no faster.

Is there some use case I'm missing?

Comment Re:Still Confused .... (Score 2, Informative) 435

I'm still not sure how this points to the Russians... How do we not know that it isn't some dude sitting on the beach in Tahiti and bouncing it off a server or VPN in Russia?

Because they weren't simply working with SRC and DST packets, Donald. They did actual analysis, and found that the intrusion tools were the same as those used, among other things, to hack the German Bundestag (Parliament). They found Russian language bits mistakenly left in the leaked materials—which disappeared and never emerged again once their presence was pointed out. A shared SSL certificate also implicated the Russians.

Comment Re:Says Hillary Propaganda arm Washington Post (Score 1) 113

I saw you linking those articles the other day, and read the Intercept one. The leak doesn't prove that the entire mainstream media is in bed with Hillary, following her every command.

Maybe I can shed a little light here, as a professional journalist who often talks off the record with people in positions of power.

The question you should be asking is not whether so-and-so has a friendly relationship with Candidate X. The question is, what is the effect of that relationship on their reporting? And lest you think that I'm siding with the reporters on this one... don't. I see a far-too-common tendency among reporters to shy away from criticising people with whom they have a relationship. I also see a not-as-common tendency among reporters to assume that they are required to maintain an adversarial relationship with politicians and others in positions of power.

As with all things, 95% of everything is crap. If you seek out the 5% who really do a decent job of reporting, though, you'll see some fine—and reputable—journalism.

Good old-fashioned scepticism just doesn't seem to cut it any more. I actually took comfort from the fact that even though the Clinton team could rely on Maggie Haberman to write a story... but could not rely on her to portray the story the way they wanted. That's pretty much how journalism is designed. Of course it's worthwhile to write about Clinton's vetting process; it's noteworthy and in the public interest. And as long as it's written in a properly sceptical (but not cynical) frame, it's worth reading, too.

I have a lot of time for Greenwald. He's a quality journalist. But in my opinion he often confuses his own cynicism with honest and fair scepticism. But that's praising with faint damns. Even the best journos should be read through a context filter.

Slashdot Top Deals

I came, I saw, I deleted all your files.