Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Uh, why? (Score 1) 134

Compared to the OS/2 VDM, NTVDM is pretty limited. No hardware access, I don't think you can even run any DOS besides the included DOS 5 whereas on OS/2 you can run most any DOS though there are limits like no long file name support due to the OS catching disk access and using the OS/2 disk system, which was the reason back in the day that DOS and Win3.1 was faster on OS/2 then native, better disk access including the file system, currently JFS.

Comment Re: Uh, why? (Score 2) 134

Warp v4+ requires 16 MBs of ram and a 486DX with many current programs requiring an i686.
I ran Warp v3 on a 386 with 4MBs of ram that eventually became a 486slc with 8 MBs. It ran fine once you stripped it down (no WPS).
Today, there are memory problems. Run Firefox, Thunderbird and OpenOffice and ram will get fragmented forcing a reboot every few days. Run older programs and lots of people report long up times.
49 days after OS/2 2.0 was released, the bug reports came flowing in, OS/2 couldn't handle the up time counter overflowing and it was fixed shortly after. For comparison, it took years for someone to keep Win95 up long enough to find the similar bug.

Comment Re:Uh, why? (Score 1) 134

Dosbox is slow and doesn't allow access to hardware, good for games but not much else. DOS (and Winos2) on OS/2 runs in ring 2 and will allow most device drivers to run like on bare metal. You can also run each Win3.1 program in its own process, side by side on the desktop and communicate between them much like if they were running in the same process.
There are problems with some graphic cards on modern hardware as the video driver depends on the VESA bios, which seems to be going away.

Comment Re:doubt the viability (Score 1) 223

My apologies, somehow I missed your response....

So, if those miracle 10 minute chargeable batteries are so common

Not particularly common, but available. Most manufacturers prefer energy density to charge time. You get ~2/3rds the energy density on fast charging packs that you get on the highest density 18650s.

So, a little less energy density (30%?) I think for fast charge rates people would give up 30% runtime in a whole host of pluggable environments. So there must be some other reason we don't see reliable fast charge batteries in common applications. I'm thinking cost would be number one.

(Hoverboards) So far, some reports have blamed the batteries, others the cables, but we don't know for sure

Having owned one, and noting that there was a significant spark when attempting to plug it in, I'd say there was more wrong with those hoverboards than just batteries or chargers... quite possible the entire charging subcomponent consisted of a single wire from plug to battery. I had to plug it in a second time just to be sure I saw what I saw, and Amazon kindly refunded it immediately.

Not a single thing that you listed uses fast charge batteries.

And yet they all wound up in smoking piles of burnt electronics.

Right. Computing is the one thing that's advanced so dramatically. Your expectation that if a technology doesn't advance as fast as computing is absurd.

Of course it's absurd. We're also in the very very beginning of this tech. It's no different than the invention of the wheel to hyperloop, just compressed down into roughly 80 years. Just wait on the next technical revolution that may go even faster - bio-engineering.

Tensile strengths? To what are you referring?

I'm referring to tensile strength. If you don't know what tensile strength is, you really need to learn some very, very basic physics. That's like saying "I don't know what mass is"

Of course of materials. Materials in all fields. Tensile strengths, compressive strengths, elastic moduli, etc have all improved with time.

Totally incorrect - the tensile strength of an elemental material is a physical limit. Now, we may have not reached those limits in manufactured components, but the tensile strength is fixed. Now, for engineered materials, we certainly are improving, as well as creating new materials and new manufacturing techniques that bring us much closer to that physical maximum we seek on a macro scale.

But like pretty much every technological field except computing, the rate of improvements are nothing at all like some endless, 1.5-year exponential growth rate.

Computers, in case you haven't noticed, have fallen off the treadmill. The last 5 years at least have almost been standing still.

Batteries win hands down.

I guess I didn't recall how recently Lithium ion batteries came into existence. They certainly increased battery performance hugely, but within them they haven't really done more than double or triple over the last 20 years. (Note, that leaves the first 10 years where there were significant improvements)

ICEs still to this date are nowhere near their Carnot limit.

But they are near the physical limits of power losses due to friction and conduction losses until a frictionless, non-melting non-conducting material can be found, at least regarding efficiency. Now power out of a given sized engine? That can still go up quite a bit, at least from what we have in our day to day cars.

Today's tires are better in rolling resistance, comfort, safety, *and* cost than those of several decades ago. But again, the curve is nothing like that of computing.

Actually, tires have improved tremendously in many ways, reliability, treadwear, improved wet traction, lowered noise (due both to materials and tread design) etc etc etc. Rolling resistance is something that has not improved tremendously, since there were very low rolling resistance tires quite a ways back, and those were actually worsened wrt to rolling resistance to increase comfort. I'd say the biggest improvements were the combination of treadwear and traction, and then separately, reliability. I still recall belts (both regular and radials) breaking in tires and causing blowouts. A spare was expected to be used, now, it's truly "in case of emergency only" if you even have one.

You're holding batteries to the standard of the one thing that's advanced faster than everything else (computing). Which is ridiculous.

The point here is that a battery is still like a 1800s wood burning steam engine compared to the charging rate of a battery

I can't even parse that sentence.

In a word - supercapacitor. Another word - flow. Both beat regular batteries in certain areas of performance, both have their drawbacks. I'd love a supercapacitor with the energy density of the best lithium battery at the large scale cost of a flow battery.

Somehow we got hung up on computers and all related tech and the amazing improvements over the previous 40 years. However, that curve has significantly flattened, like Thor's hammer hit it, at least until there's a fundamental shift, much like with batteries when lithium ion batteries were introduced. I will predict that genetic engineering is about to enter a similar phase of amazing improvement, provided we don't wind up killing ourselves.

Comment Re:So far the phone mfg with a public problem.. (Score 1) 51

Publicising their QA process now serves to help defend against current and future litigation.

It doesn't do squat against current litigation. Litigation already in progress related to a past event isn't going to be helped by what you started doing today to prevent said event in the future.

Comment Re:Nintendo is done (Score 1) 89

Complaining about system performance? The "upgrade" is less capable than the system it is supposed to replace. That's about as valid a complaint as there can be. That said, I never complained about the performance, I pointed out that, while it would be quite a winner in Nintendo's handheld lineup (e.g. I actually like the hardware), they chose to position it as a replacement for a more capable system. That makes it a loser; it's positioned to be, quite literally, a downgrade.

I can think of at least 1 other company that went that route.. **cough** Apple **cough** mini **cough**

Look at it this way: The Geo Metro wasn't a horrible car, for what it was. It was cheap, fuel efficient, and got you from point A to point B. It wasn't built really well and it is obvious that corners were cut, but that was fine because Geo sold it as what it was: cheap transportation. If they had sold it as a sports car, luxury car, or even anything of any quality, it would have been complete crap.

The Geo Metro was maybe 1 step above a Yugo and only maybe slightly less prone to breaking down. Sometimes it is better to not have a particularly bad version of a thing.

I still own a Wii, I saw no reason to "upgrade" to any of their later stuff, as you noted, nothing really compelling about any of them. For me, Wii U didn't float 5 years ago, and nothing has changed in that regard. I mean, I think my 5 year old smartphone in the drawer is a better piece of kit, it just doesn't have the content.

Comment Re:Here's the actual problem, (Score 4, Interesting) 191

Admission of non-citizens into the US is not a right and is not subject to due process. Non-citizens can be denied entry for arbitrary reasons, not just in the US but also in all other countries on the planet.

On the other hand, the US signed a treaty (actually a couple) that says my wife and son, both not citizens of the USA, can wander into the USA any time they want. According to the American Constitution, treaties are the second highest law of the land, just below the Constitution. Of course America being America, all it takes is a Supreme Court Justice to say, "no, the Constitution actually means something else" and America has a long history of breaking their own laws and especially treaties. Probably the reason they dropped the u out of honour.
Through other treaties and such, my son also has the right to go to a few other countries as well.

Comment Re:Leveling the playing field (Score 1) 68

It's GST, sales tax on services. The Uber driver won't be paying it unless they lower their fares so the customers pay the same as before, they just collect it.
If the drivers are smart, they'll register themselves as a business, get a tax number, and get reimbursed for whatever GST they pay for business purposes, things like gas, vehicle maintenance along with the vehicle, clothes, phones etc. Might actually come out ahead.

Slashdot Top Deals

Help fight continental drift.