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:But Apple get its 30% cut still. (Score 0) 50

Right, because Intel hasn't yet released any mobile chips that support 32GB in 2 DIMMs. Well, other than the i7 in my wife's gaming laptop, which was already an older model when I bought it for her more than a year ago.

Right, it's Intel's fault Apple doesn't sell laptops with the maximum amount of RAM possible. You know, just like the 2011 MacBook Pro I have sitting next to me could only possibly use 8GB of RAM (again, due to Intel's limitations, supposedly) but it's been running just fine with 16GB (and able to use all of it as well) of aftermarket RAM for 6 years.

No QUAD CORE, KABY LAKE's (or later) that supported more than 32 GB, sorry. That's what Apple was counting on.

And the much lower power consumption of the Kaby's was ESSENTIAL to Apple meeting the THERMAL BUDGET for the design.

And THAT was ESSENTIAL for the 2016 MBP's being able, unlike its 2015 predecessor, to run full-tilt, with NO THERMAL THROTTLING of the CPU nor GPU, making the new MBP MUCH faster in SUSTAINED high-demand Applications than its predecessor, EVEN THOUGH THE CPU IS ABOUT 8% SLOWER.

And IIRC, your 2011 MBP only supported 16 GB after APPLE released a FIRMWARE REVISION. So perhaps it just took them a little bit to develop and debug the firmware patch, "Qualify" their memory controller with a good sampling of different memory modules, and get all the sign offs necessary to push out something as potentially catastrophic as a "BIOS" update. Perhaps they didn't feel they could get all that done by the initial engineering cutoff (freeze) date. So they shipped with an 8 GB limit at first.

So, sounds like "Engineering in the Real World" to me.

Comment Re:No (Score 2) 171 needs to respect copyright law and stop this blatant reproduction of protected works!

Unless I explicitly consent to archiving (or searching for that matter), my content should never reside on someone else's server.

Sounds like you shouldn't have put that information on the Internet in the first place.

Comment Re: Repurposing Macs significantly harder than win (Score 1) 223

I installed Windows 10, Kodi and NextPVR on a 2006 Acer Aspire Idea 500 that came with a 32bit 1.83Ghz Intel Core Duo, not long ago.

Runs perfectly well - boots up in about 30-45 seconds from the HDD. No problems with multiple tabs in Edge, even handles the video decoding for live TV from the built-in tuner (with the drivers installed automatically).

Meanwhile my sister's struggling to open Finder on her 2015 MacBook Air (4GB RAM) because she has two windows open in Chrome and a dozen PDFs in preview.

Chrome is well-known to be the hog-of-all-resources.

I have 4 GB of RAM in the 2012 MacBook Pro, and, using Safari, I could have more than that open without any performance issues.

Comment Re:Any propoganda is bad. (Score 1) 223

The fact is, Apple is built on propoganda. Their total investment of an iPhone after it arrives in the store is only usd50.

The hardware is always 2 generations behind modern and the softwate is constricted to a seamless user interaction with software administrative privileges withheld from the owner or lessee.

Other non Apple manufacturers have tried this, like Samsung and LG claiming to own all data and the hardware itself, and they just look foolish when the software is 3rd party.

The original propoganda is that these are phones tgat can be searched under shitty "transmitting utility" codes that bring Unites States out of Washington DC. These are computers used less for communicating, a complete disrespect of concept even by Amateur Radio Relay League.standards.



Comment Re:User's need to take responsibility too. (Score 1) 223

The best thing we can do is to resist the pressure to upgrade our gadgets. No we don't need to upgrade every year and no we don't need the new shiny gadget that will be put in the dump in a few months. The fix starts with us.

I hate to say it, but I think we've already lost this battle.

I run a Galaxy Note 3, and have done so since about its release date back in Sept 2013. For me, it's flawless - 4 monster CPUs, a great OLED screen, thermometer, barometer, hygrometer, great camera (with 4k video), LTE/MiMo, running CM13 (Android 6.0.1). I have no reason or desire to upgrade. None. I'll still be using this phone for 3 or 4 more years unless I break or lose it.

Here's the trick: I'm on my third replacement battery.

This behavior costs the incumbent manufacturers money, and they have put a stop to it by gluing batteries into devices. They all do it now. It's disgusting. And we allow it. And don't be surprised if they start chipping and authenticating the batteries in the future.

This is the battleground, and very few people seem to understand it. Gluing batteries into phones encourages users to replace them at least every two years (as they typically start just long enough to last a day, and after two years, can't do that anymore). Replacement is mandatory, for many users, after 3. Forget about 5, 6, or 10 years.

The practice should be illegal as it is a huge waste of resources, recycling or not.

If Samsung would stop overcharging their batteries, they'd last longer. That's a fact.

My iPad 2 at 5 years old and HEAVY use daily, still has nearly 100% of the battery life it did brand new, nor has the charge time changed in any noticeable way.

My iPhone 4s (although I don't use it anymore), went into the drawer with no appreciable battery life or charge time difference from new.

My current iPhone 6 Plus, going on 3 years now (I think), still lasts about 4 days of general use, and again, I haven't noticed any degradation of battery life or change in charge-time.

Samsung just beats the hell out of their batteries, and guess what? They don't last under those conditions.

Comment Re:User's need to take responsibility too. (Score 1) 223

No we don't need to upgrade every year

With crap like forced updates and batteries that can't be replaced, the companies are certainly trying to rectify that little weakness in their plans.


Apple does not force updates. I ran iOS 7 on my iPad for forever, and I still run OS X 10.9 on my MacBook Pro.

As for batteries: They are replaceable. Just not as easily as you would like.

Comment Re:Still Don't Get It (Score 0) 65

You didn't get them if you were running an older device. For example, I still use a 2011 Mac Mini at home and it had the older version of these apps it came with, but I paid for the upgrade to the couple I actually use.

Despite the jokes, Mac users don't really have to upgrade annually... Until a few months ago, I was using a 4s phone!

I run a G5 Tower as a Security Computer, FTP Server and iTunes Server in my living room.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Catch a wave and you're sitting on top of the world." - The Beach Boys