Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



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

Comment Re:So what. (Score 1) 156

No, I will not purchase a dvd when a HD is available.

Nor will I.

No, I will not purchase a blu-ray...Yes, I'll pay for a movie in one of the common streaming services for $10-$20 per movie.

I, OTOH, will not do a streaming service except as a last resort. So far that has not been necessary.

It's clearly a generational thing. Many older individuals can't seem to understand that dvds are inconvenient.

It is clearly a generational thing. Many younger individuals can't seem to get the concept that paying over and over for "borrowing" something is a bad deal. Wait until you have to pay per play (the end goal of the MPAA/RIAA) and you have to pay for your yet to be born kids to watch tomorrow's Barney equivalent 10 times a day for a year, at $0.99 a view. The physical media would have only put you back $10, max. Oh, and what if you wish to watch something that's older than last year? (Oblivion, Edge of Tomorrow, Pacific Rim) or even within the last year (Star Wars 7) These are all available to me, to watch any time. Even if I don't have an internet connection. Simply shocking, I know. No internet!

Comment Re:Who needs 4k video? (Score 1) 74

4K video is hardly the future, its right up there with 3D TV, Curved Screens, Smart TV.

The reason 4K will succeed is HDR. That actually adds value that people can see. Otherwise, the only thing 4K helps with is addressing some of the shortcomings of those cheap LED/LCD based TVs (smaller pixels means less noticeable artifacts, but they're still there)

Comment Re:Really?!? (Score 1) 74

as you insult Android which can play the videos that Apple users are unable to play.

I think it's funny that no one's mentioned that Google now serves a 4K video codec developed by Google that purposefully doesn't have a universal fallback into a standard format, and people complain that Apple Safari can't play it. Not that it matters to me, all streaming quality sucks regardless, I prefer better sources.

Comment Re:Bye-bye, DVD (Score 3, Informative) 156

but, in addition, they tend to be shipped with unskippable junk that you have to watch every single time, before watching the material you are interested in.

It takes about 2 minutes of typing occasionally at the command line to rip the main title of the DVD and save it as an MKV file. Then, whenever you want to watch the film now or in the future, you don't have to deal with anything else that might be on that DVD. You never even have to take the DVD down from the shelf again unless you catastrophically lose data from your computer with no backups. I understand if the average man complains about unskippable ads or whatever, but how can one consider this a huge inconvenience on a "news for nerds" site?

Comment Re:Should I care? (Score 1, Interesting) 156

When I download files through torrent communities, I look for the magic words "BD rip" or "BD remux" or, for films not yet available in high def, DVD9. That means that you are getting bit-for-bit the same quality as the released Blu-ray/DVD. If studios stop releasing physical media and everything is available only through streaming websites, then you're only going to be able to get your films with lesser quality or higher filesizes.

Comment Re:While you're at it Apple . . . (Score 1) 265

Nice trolling. I am currently suffering with one of those MacBooks. I hate myself for throwing that money down the drain. I might as well burned it. It would have been more fun than the pain my MacBook is causing me. I can't even plug it into an external monitor or a wired network.

2 dongles take care of both of those issues, and both are sold relatively inexpensively by Apple, today. You can find other solutions that may be cheaper if you'd only use that browser wisely.

Comment Re: They said they want us to die... (Score 1) 265

I can't find a definitive answer as to whether the physical RAM is limited in macOS to less than 18 exabytes; but at least 128 GB of physical RAM seems to be well-documented.

You won't find the limit on physical RAM because that limit is directly related to Intel CPUs RAM limitations, which for most OSes is going to be below what they can support. It will likely be a while before RAM speed, size, and memory controllers get to a point that most current OSes will need to be concerned about whether they support all physical memory on a machine.

Submission + - Law for Autonomous Vehicles: Supporting an Aftermarket for Driving Computers (perens.com)

Bruce Perens writes: How will we buy self-driving cars, and how will we keep them running as self-driving software and hardware becomes obsolete much more rapidly than the vehicle itself? Boalt Hall legal professor Lothar Determann and Open Source Evangelist Bruce Perens are publishing an article in the prestigious Berkeley Technology Law Journal on how the law and markets might support an aftermarket for self-driving computers, rather than having the manufacturer lock them down or sell driving as a service rather than selling cars. The preprint is available to read now, and discusses how an Open Car, based on Open Standards and an Open Market, but not necessarily Open Source, can drive prices down and quality up over non-competitive manufacturer lock-in.

Comment Re: They said they want us to die... (Score 1) 265

Number one reason would be to be able to run several virtual machines, to try different OSes and environments at the same time.

I regularly run 2-3 VMs, no issues with 16GB. I test on those, I don't run production applications in them. For anything more than mere functional testing, I run a full external server configured to deal with production type loads to validate the scaling approaches and performance as it would be in production.

Number two would be that some of us code really memory intensive algorithms (robotics and machine vision in my case).

I have coded memory intensive algorithms, even back when you were charged by the KB used. You learn to use optimized memory algorithms that also have been tuned for CPU cycles (we also got charged by the thousand CPU clicks, IIRC) Fortunately I don't have to spend that much time optimizing my code anymore, since CPU time and memory are cheap, today, but if you're exceeding 16GB for an app in development, you need to revisit your approach. (I'll grant you that I haven't dealt with machine vision, but I can't imagine that the memory requirements are really that large. The CPU requirements are a different story, at least with what image/video processing I have dealt with)

Comment Re: They said they want us to die... (Score 1) 265

I run multiple VMs, IDEs, and a couple of DBs. All in 24GB. I could upgrade to 48GB, but haven't seen the need as I normally don't swap. Browsers in VMs generally don't require all that much memory, provided you have specific VMs for browsers only, and don't have a jack of all trades VM that happens to also work as your browser VM. I also run a similar configuration on my MBP, in 16GB. It also rarely swaps. However, 32GB would be a nice bump, as I am hitting 14+GB on a regular basis, and a bit more headroom is always welcome.

Slashdot Top Deals

"May your future be limited only by your dreams." -- Christa McAuliffe

Working...