Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


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

Comment Re:non-news is non-news (Score -1, Troll) 153

All modern NAND flash memory does "quasi-RAID".

That depends 100% on the sort of controllers & memory layouts that are involved.

Do you have specific information that Apple does this? I don't.

If not, best to be quiet.

That said, 128GB should only be 4 times faster than 32GB, so if these figures are correct then the 32GB units are also using lower spec memory.

Which again goes back to the point of what I have posted... and this article.

Comment Re:non-news is non-news (Score 4, Interesting) 153

On my shelf not three feet away I've got an early prototype of a a logic board for a system later shipped with 2, 4 or 8 flash memory chips back in 2003... a board I owned a good bit of code for. At no point was there any talk of us accessing multiple chips at a time, instead the existing sequential read/write capacity was enough for our needs.

The same goes for any embedded device today, regardless of potential # of memory chips... the manufacturer is only going to parallelize read/write access under two circumstances:

1) no one on the test team noticed them doing so,
2) there is actually a need to do so in order to boost performance... which may not be applicable across all units.

#2 breaks down as it's like putting a hardware raid controller in every PC/server mobo with multiple sata ports. Sure some % of users may end up with multiple HDs attached... why should the manufacturer pay the added cost of baking this extra speed in when it is clearly an add on (or premium upgrade) option?

Comment Re:Non-issue? (Score 1) 153

It does suck if your phone doesn't get the performance that could be achieved (and is achieved by other phones) but I'm not sure what this would mean in real life.

You must not be an American! *the previous point being pointed out by an American.

Do you need this performance on a mobile device such as a phone?

Need? Since when were the bill of rights, general contract law or general mobile phone performance specifications based on 'need'?

As the data transfer test proved, it's not eight times slower for that, it only takes somewhat longer.

Which unfortunately will mean that a lawyer, somewhere will be hired to take this on as a case, then seek to escalate it to class action status on behalf of all of those who purchased an iPhone 7 with memory on the smaller end, believing they would have the same perf as those on the higher end... such at times is unfortunately the American way.

I thought it was normal the fewer flash chips perform worse.

In a batch of chips... there will be those which perform better or worse... normally they will either be segregated into to separate product lines (say SE vs Plus) or discarded to lessor products, or worse the trash.

Comment Re:Well... (Score 1) 153


Unlike a spinning disc/disk where assuming identical rotational speeds and platter counts... a higher capacity one is going to be able to read/write bits faster simply because they happen to land under the heads more often for a higher capacity driver than a lower capacity one... for a solid state storage device... those 'free' size 'advantages go away.

Comment Re:non-news is non-news (Score 4, Insightful) 153

Unless Apple is doing some sort of quasi RAID like read/write access against all available memory chips (vs treating them like a sequential memory space which may end earlier rather than later depending on what memory capacity you selected at purchase time)... why should a higher capacity device have faster read/write times than a lower capacity of the same generation?

If anything, this sounds like another example of Apple attempting to balkinize the market in a way favorable to them and those who are most willing and/or able to pay them the most for devices.

Comment Re:Apple today, MS yesterday (Score 1) 283

My oh my... the goal posts seem to have been moved again.

I never claimed it was an OPEN standard.

No, but earlier I referred to 3.55mm jacks being "a widely used standard had won out as anyone could implement it", which does sorta meet the definition of 'open standard'.

You then brought up MFi, claiming "Sure you can! What do you think Apple's MFi Program is for? It is PRECISELY for OEMs that want to design Lightning-Compatible devices."

Which as you acknowledge now... isn't actually 100% true.

But then, neither is Zigbee.

Who said anything about Zigbee?

Both are licensed.

Just because a standard is open, doesn't mean it's cost or license free for all to use.

Going to make some DRAM? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (for royalties on the patents that cover the underlying technology).

Going to make a USB device? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (ie getting your own VID).

Going to be making a network adapter? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (for a MAC address range).

Going to be making a PC motherboard? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (see above).

Let me say this again, and I'll try to use small words as you are clearly having comprehension issues.

An open standard allows anyone to build a product that meets the specification. Sometimes, there are licensing costs associated with it.

MFi, is not an open standard as Apple at it's sole discretion (too big of a word? option? choice?) can veto any product which it thinks would compete with it's own lines... which includes host devices.

But honestly, I don't really see a proscription in the wording of the document you linked against creating another "host" device that supported Lightning.

Read it again, it refers only to devices which plug into iPhones, iPods & iPads.

For example, I believe I saw an article for a Lightning memory stick, but I might be mistaken.

And unless they are like this one and also include a USB port, will only work with a Lightning compatible devices (ie iPhones, iPods & iPads).

In fact, there are quite a few such a devices... it's as if most of them know that because Lightning isn't a standard which will likely ever be available on non Apple hardware, that they have to add a standard plug on it as well so people can use it on devices adhering to a more common standard.

But if approached by the right entity,

If such an approach requires being the right entity, then no, it weakens any semblance of openness of MFi wrt host devices.

Apple really might let a Lightning connector exist on a competitor's device.

Might? And what possible evidence is there of such a thing?

Yes, I believe that could happen.

No doubt you also believe in unicorns and that 9/11 was an inside job.

Comment Re:Apple today, MS yesterday (Score 1) 283

Again we see how you just don't understand the arguments being put towards you.

What do you think Apple's MFi Program is for?

Um... further balkinization in favor of the Apple ecosystem?

It is PRECISELY for OEMs that want to design Lightning-Compatible devices.

Half true... as it covers only half of the sort of devices which could exist... ie things which plug into an iPhone/iPad/iOS device.

If tomorrow Google or Samsung went to Apple and said "We want our next phone to be a Lightning-Compatible device"... Do you honestly think Apple would go for that? Their own wording suggests otherwise:

So much for it being an open standard which both device and accessory makers can build for.

Some high-end headphones still come with 1/4" plugs. You would be in the same boat if you wanted to use them, wouldn't you?

Key word: *some*, and in the grand scheme of the market... they are a rounding error... so no, you wouldn't be in the same boat they are targeted towards the more niche markets of stationary use, either in a studio or physically attached to a stereo/record player/etc.

Care to try to compare apples to apples maybe?

No. Maybe you should do a better job of putting those "concerns" in perspective.

I'm sorry that your perspective & imagination is so limited, it's a pretty common attitude I've been seeing from mac fans (as your name suggests) who cannot comprehend of things other than what they have experienced.

Lemme guess... do you think that touch enabled displays on a desktop/laptop is stupid due to 'gorilla arms'? I've heard that argument from Mac users since Steve Jobs said it... and have used touch enabled desktops & laptops and did find them useful from time to time.

If you have a device that gets a WORKING WEEK's worth of run-time playing music,

Just playing music... limited radio traffic, screen off, just music, not unlike the horsepower in an engine is tested (ie not in a car, driving down the road)... as artificially as can be so as to produce the maximum theoretical results.

Apple is a good bit more honest than you on this, they even say the following at the bottom of the iPhone 7 specs page:

All battery claims depend on network configuration and many other factors; actual results will vary.

Why would they say that? Throw in other device usages, you know, GPS, a radio or two, maybe even some gaming? You don't think you'll have a good bit less available time?

They even admit all of this ( if you do a little more reading.

and you REALLY think you're going to get caught-out having to charge while continuing to listen to music, you need to spend a little more time in the real-world.

I see how quickly my wife can drain her iPhone 6s Plus if she's away from a charger for too long, thankfully she has the option to charge it while having a mini-stereo plug attached when she's in the car.

You're right. It is also about Embrace, Enhance, Extinguish. Especially with the Linux stuff.

Like I said, you know little of the Satya kool-aid, whose views on tech, leadership & open source are rather different than Steve's, try to keep up?

Comment Re:Apple today, MS yesterday (Score 1) 283

Apple tore down the walls of its own garden a few YEARS ago, when they started allowing full-blown Sideloading of any ol' iOS App the User wanted.

So we should just ignore the rules of the store (though shall not compete with any of our apps/services)? Or the fact that to develop for their platform, you need to already buy into their platform? Ex: You can use a Linux box to build a Windows, MacOS or Linux app pretty easily, and per all of the rules, however if you attempt to do something like... build a Xamarin app in... Visual Studio on Windows, suddenly you require an MacOS device to do the building. Not for technical reasons, but for legal ones.

when a large percentage of audio equipment was still shipping (and some still does!) with 1/4" jacks?

Stationary maybe, not portable.

Thinking back on just my own purchases... I do not recall ever owning a portable cassette (boombox or Walkman), CD or MP3 player which had a 1/4" jack, only 3.5mm.

Hell, even the original Sony Walkman back in '79 only had a 3.5mm connection.

Because, JUST LIKE APPLE, the headphone manufacturers INCLUDED AN ADAPTER. So, pray tell, how is this ANY different?!?

And over the years I got many of those adapters... even later airplane ones, never used any because mini-stereo, a widely used standard had won out as anyone could implement it. PCs, portables, autos, airplanes, you name it. Can't say the same about Lightning, can we?

And don't bring up the ridiculously-overblown bug-boo about "Charging while listening".

So all of those people who actually have that as a problem are wrong... because *you* are ok with adapters and think the battery has enough capacity for your type of usage? Good for you! Not all of us are so easily sold.

Some of us may use our devices heavily when not in a location we are able to charge, but once we reach our car want to add some juice while listening to audio from the device.

Second, there are about a dozen adapters, some as inexpensive as $10, that allow doing just that.

Yup, none which have the ease of what existed before (ie not having to deal with a dock or some small brick hanging from your device if you happen to pick it up). I continue to be surprised no one has released anything as simple as this one, but for lightning as it gives you the benefits of a single cord, and puts any clutter of the mini-stereo cable away from the handset.

If you have spent $700 on a new phone, one would think that $10 wouldn't be that much of a financial hardship, eh?

Maybe... it's not about the money?

Heck, if you are so quick to dismiss the legit concerns about "charging while listening"... perhaps you should do a better job understanding the concerns?

Personally I usually have a pair of earbuds in my pocket... they work just fine with my cell phone, tablet, laptop, even my gaming controller. If I owned an iPhone 7, I could simply carry that adapter with me all of the time and use it where needed... however that gets into a lot of hassle. Or I could drop $10 per location I usually plug in some audio device (home, work, car, work area in garage, etc)... but then I am participating in a sort of balkanization I have zero willingness to join in on.

Oh, and the reason that Microsoft APPEARS to be moving in a more "Open" direction? THEY ARE SCARED TO DEATH. Period.

You really should look into the Satya kool-aid a bit more, it's not as simple as that.

Comment Apple today, MS yesterday (Score 0, Flamebait) 283

It is remarkable to think about how their relative positions have changed in just a decade or two.

Back in the 90's, Microsoft had the kind of dominant position that they could lock out companies who didn't play by their rules, and kept building a vision of technologies that put them in the center of everything... while Apple was talking about industry standers.

Today: Apple has the walled garden with iOS that MS could only have dreamed of, with the iPhone 7, they gave the finger to any semblance of industry standards with the loss of the headphone jack, while Microsoft open sources things like the .NET run time and even has baked in Ubuntu components into Windows 10.

Had any of us been betting on such an outcome 10-20 years ago, no one would have believed it.

Comment The solution is simple... (Score 0, Offtopic) 87

Obama must tomorrow order the NSA to hack Roscosmos, obtain complete specifications for the Soyuz platform, open source it, then contract with a different 3rd party to build our own line... but rather than using domestic parts/labor, outsource the whole thing to India or China to save on costs.

While the NSA is at it, best to find some dirty emails regarding Putin to help sway the election back the way they want it.

Slashdot Top Deals

Lavish spending can be disastrous. Don't buy any lavishes for a while.