So by your reasoning, if a car manufacturer accidentally made a bug which caused the engine to cheat on diesel emissions tests, it's actually the EPA's fault for not designing their test to more accurately mimic how people use their cars in real life?
Not even remotely. I'm saying that if there was a bug where putting the transmission into test mode caused emissions to go out of spec, but almost no one except for technicians would ever go into that mode, then it's a lot different from the case where the average owner should expect their emissions to be out of spec.
Your no-spin version is somewhat correct, except that it misses the key fact that CR reported those bad numbers and told people not to buy the laptop because of them. If Ford says a Focus should get 30MPG and testing shows it really gets 25MPG, then that's probably a legitimate result explainable by different testing scenarios. But if Consumer Reports puts their Focus into a test mode that regular owners will never use, and it gets somewhere between 13.5MPG and 58.5MPG, then something's probably gone wrong. Given that it's Ford and not Joe's Crawfish and Car Factory, it doesn't seem unreasonable for CR to doublecheck their results before publishing a "don't buy a Ford Focus because it only gets 13.5MPG!" recommendation.
(Note: those numbers are to scale. Apple says the 13" MBP should get 10 hours of web usage. CR said it varies from 4.5 to 19.5 hours. I multiplied those by 3MPG/hour to show the proportions.)
No, it's actually a Bug. The article describes a problem with the "Disable Caches" setting such that:
use of this developer setting also triggered an obscure and intermittent bug reloading icons which created inconsistent results in their lab.
But many developers probably use Safari Developer Mode to work on their projects, and this will help them.
Yes, but those developers don't get their recommendations from Consumer Reports. That magazine's audience would never have encountered that bug.
Obligatory car analogy: say they're testing a Ford Focus. They disable its antilock brakes so that a professional driver can get its best-case dry pavement stopping distance. Along the way, the find an OBD-II bug that causes the brakes to take twice as long to stop the car. They report the bad results instead of the normal, expected values. Yes, their test was correct! It found a bug that needs to be fixed. However, the only people who would ever see that bug are the exact ones who'd notice something was wrong and be able to troubleshoot it. You and I aren't ever going to disable our antilock brakes, even if a test engineer might.
I think that's kind of what happened here. Again, yes, they legit found a bug. My problem with it is that they reported the buggy results instead of the actual ones that a normal non-developer would see. A developer would notice their battery draining in a fourth the expected time and that it only happened when they were debugging in Safari, so they probably wouldn't even be significantly affected by the bug.
and Streamed Content I'd argue is a much bigger % of people's traffic (volume wise (hits wise probably less so... but that is the nature of the beast))
That seems very unlikely for the usage profile of being on batteries. Sure, we all stream when we're at our desks, but I don't know how that translates to out-and-about traffic patterns. Restaurant Wi-Fi is often so spotty that you wouldn't try to listen to live streams. I doubt many people are consuming lots of video content from their cell phone tethers.
This (and iTunes) is enough for declaring it the worst MP3 player of all times.
LOL *cough* PlaysForSure *cough*
iPods aren't even in the top 10 of anti-consumer MP3 players.
Disclaimer: my first iPod was a gen 4 Touch and I'd been using Sansa devices flashed with Rockbox before it. I never owned a classic scrollwheel iPod. I sure wanted one, though, because it was far nicer than anything else at the time.
just goes to show the best product doesnt always win
Just goes to show your metric for "best" isn't aligned with the rest of the market's. iPods were the best portable MP3 players: we all took a vote with our wallets and it won. They might not have had highest values for individual specifications, but the total package was better than the competition. The same was true for iPhones. Some competitors were faster, or had higher resolution cameras, or had more storage, but none packaged everything in such a way that millions of people saw it and immediately wanted to throw cash at it.
iPhones and iPods were much better than anything that came before them. You can disagree by touting specific numbers, but almost no one outside Slashdot and similar forums cares about specs. Everyone else just wants to use the stuff they bought. Apple came to market with the first devices that concentrated on usability rather than specs and made an absolutely killing. You can't say Apple's stuff wasn't the best without naming something better, and in these cases there was no better to name.
On the other hand: Whoever released the DNC/Podesta emails did us all a huge favor.
I wish that they'd done us the same favor for the RNC. It's easy to say the DNC is awful (and they clearly are), but we have no basis for comparison for how awful they are in relative terms. That would have been an interesting comparison.
Headline: most populous state in the country has an opinion on who should lead it.
Clinton also won New York by 1.5 million votes. You could try to make a story of "without New York, Clinton would have only won by 1.4 million votes!", but that would also be dumb and misleading. In fact, if you skip all states where Clinton won, then Trump would have lead by 8.4 million votes! Of course, the opposite would have Clinton winning by 11.2 million, so you might want to keep that inconvenient fact in your pocket.
America preferred Clinton. "America, except for..." doesn't matter for shit because it wasn't "America, except for..." who votes on these things.
I can do lots of stuff myself. I can hunt for my food, or plant it. I can build furniture. I could make papyrus if I had to. And I don't do any of that because there are other things I'd rather be doing with my time. Networking was fun for the first 15 years or so, and I still enjoy it but it's no longer on the short list of my favorite hobbies. It's been demoted to something I have to get done so I can get started with my more favorite stuff.
Yeah, I like eero. I read up on it, I bought it, and I'm glad I did. There are alternatives from Google and Netgear that I also considered and I probably would have also liked quite a bit, but I can't give you a firsthand account of them because I don't have one. Why don't you give them a shot and report back?
Why? Because these have the potential to be infinitely better. I'm not going to detail my geek cred, but suffice it to say for these purposes that I usually build my own Linux-based routers. I'm not allergic to solder or compiling kernels. But I bought a 3-unit eero system over Thanksgiving and it's been a godsend.
These networks aren't so much hubs as layer 2 switches. Know how your phone jumps from one station to another as you move through the house? How it's automatic and quick, but sometimes totally breaks the connect and makes Netflix stutter or VOIP calls drop? eero at least totally ends that. Connections are rock solid even as they bounce from one router to another. And they do bounce. If my kid and I are sitting on the couch using our phones, and both of us start streaming videos, eero is smart enough to push one of us off onto a different router so we're not interfering with each other's connection.
I would not willingly go back to a handbuilt network now. I've only had a mesh network for a month and a half, but it's so much better than anything I'd pieced together myself that I'm retiring from the practice. Laugh if you want to or dismiss it as "I could do that myself for a fourth the price!", but keep an open mind. I think this is the way of the future.
Your code should be more efficient!