Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Compare cell phone plans using Wirefly's innovative plan comparison tool ×

Comment Re:not important (Score 1) 226

If Mozilla is paying non developers to work on these awful logos, they need to redirect their spending to hire more developers.

What made Mozilla think there was something wrong with their highly recognizable current logo?

It's like New Coke, but worse. Some of the logos look like street grafitti. Or the result of an explosion in a neon paint factory.

Comment Re:Only one of these is even intelligible. (Score 3, Informative) 226

'Tweaking' a logo is supposed to mean that the new logo is largely recognizable from the old logo. Not that it is completely different.

Microsoft would like to 'tweak' my Linux system so that it runs Windows 10.

Most of the proposed logos are not legible or immediately intelligible. And certainly not recognizable as the Mozilla brand. If I saw one of these logos, my immediate reaction would be that some clown is trying to capitalize on the Mozilla name recognition, and not doing a very good job.

Comment Called it (Score 1) 275

From when they announced cumulative updates:

But I don't see Microsoft going back to redo a patching system they've thrown out in Win10 to do us a favor, it seems far more likely they want to bundle it all from security patching to ads to telemetry to nagware.

Still hoping there will be separate KBs that you can install/uninstall for corporate/expert users and that the cumulative update is just what they push on the update site but since they've become plain evil lately it's hard to say.

Comment Re:Wayland bashing (Score 1) 151

But some 10 years ago clients started doing client rendering and just sending bitmaps to the display server. Mostly that meant higher bandwidth and fewer round-trips. Whether that is good or bad depends on the clients and the environment.

Actually they started doing that back in the 90s, the X primitives were already very outdated when KDE/Gnome launched in 1998/1999. And this is really the core issue, if you want a modern looking Linux with gradients, transparency, animations, anti-aliasing and various pretty effects you let a graphics toolkit do the job and hand X a bitmap. And they run roughly as bad under remote X as under VNC, because under those circumstances they do pretty much the same thing.

The applications that do work well using remote X are the same applications that shy away from the "render bitmaps" strategy and with their primitives they look... primitive. Functional sure, but as a local desktop application they look like a legacy tool that hasn't recieved any love in the last 20 years. And you can't fix that without turning them into bitmap-pushers, which is of course met with the same level of scorn as replacing X.

It seems to me that wayland initially was infested by the type of developers that think that all they need is direct access to video memory, and for remote applications all you need is VNC-style full-desktop remote. Of course people who use remote X think that that is a myopic and arrogant view. It seems that wayland has gained some developers in the past few years who have more common sense

There's actually not a lot of sense in trying to make one system that'll work both for graphics hooked up over a >15GB/s x16 PCIe 3.0 link with nanosecond latency and a system with 1/1000th the bandwidth and 1000x the latency. Applications will tend to work well in just one of those two scenarios no matter what kind of protocol you wrap it in, even if it's theoretically network transparent. If it wasn't being used, it wouldn't be the fastest interlink we have in modern computers.

I'm one of those that hopes remote X dies in a fire so we can have a 21st century Linux desktop. What remote X does today would be better done using web interfaces or dedicated client-server software that would transfer only the data necessary, instead of trying to keep the graphics so simple it's easier to describe them as lines and boxes and text than to actually send the pixels. Because that's what you must do to make the X model "work".

Comment Re:Microsoft broke my scanner once... (Score 2) 220

Because the USB device didn't even get recognized at all? ;)

So you jest but compliant USB Video Class devices (read: webcams) have been supported since 2008. It's actually a standard much like you plug in any USB keyboard, mouse, pendrive etc. and it usually works. It's quite amazing that Microsoft managed to break such a widely adopted standard. I'm guess they're just setting the standard for what "supported lifetime" you'll have before Windows 10 refuses to run.

Comment Re:Translated for Realists (Score 1) 282

9. Better Food through Science: Someone Else's farm.

I'll just pick one to keep the size manageable, who cares? It's already not my farm. I'm more than happy to use my skills to earn money so I can go to the grocery store and buy someone else's product, I don't care one bit for farming and certainly not the small scale "get your hands dirty" kind. The efficient trading of products and services has been the greatest boon to productivity in human history, with automation a close second. Am I supposed to feel it's a downside that I paid somebody for a washing machine, so I didn't have to do my own laundry? Sure I don't want my tools to exploit me, but that's the downside to a huge upside. I'd much rather take an Android or iPhone over no smartphone at all. YMMV, enjoy your hermit cave.

Comment Re:Of cores not (Score 1) 188

Given the massive layoffs and 2-year delay on 10nm... Intel knows its in trouble. Their main two competitors (by semiconductor manufacturing market share) are TSMC and Samsung and both will have 10nm chips rolling out the door a year before Intel even begins testing its 10nm fab. Even Toshiba might beat them to 10nm.

Intel has been testing 10nm for a long time, but they never announce milestones and test chips only finished volume products. They've lost their lead, but I doubt they'll be far behind if any.

Comment Re:Feeling vs Information (Score 1) 290

Voice can help you understand the EMOTION behind a person's communication. But text is far better at passing INFORMATION.

My main objection is that I just don't see the situation where you'd want to simply pass the emotion. If I start a conversion like "Hey Dave, I'm a bit concerned about the $foobar interface..." I'd like to know if your response is "Oh? I think it's excellent" or "Yeah, me too" before I go on. If I'm trying to describe something like "I want it to be gloomy" I want to hear some feedback like "So, like sad, melancholic gloomy or creepy, haunted gloomy?" to hear what they understood by it. And if I wanted to show I care I sure as hell would call and say "I'm so sorry to hear your dog died, are you okay?" not send a voice message. Monologues are mostly ego puff pieces of the person sending them.

Comment Re:Surprised? (Score 1) 138

Trademarks only protect use in trade. As this was basically a hobbyist project and given away for free, was it using the name 'Pokemon' by way of trade?

That's not even close to the legal definition. Trademark infringement is offering a product or service that is confusingly similar to an official, licensed one by use of trade marks. Why you do it doesn't matter. That it's free doesn't mean much when many actual games have free demos or a freemium business model. Could a reasonable person think that "Pokemon Uranium" is an official Pokemon game? If the answer to that is yes - and this is as blatant as it gets - it's game over.

Comment Re:Summary is a bit misleading and lacks context (Score 2) 81

I can guarantee that Mr. Krzanich and the Intel board would never allow their foundry business to cannibalize their current core discrete CPU business for a "competitor" if they felt it was detrimental to their overall financial and operating picture. This ARM deal is a piece of a larger plan of maximizing their ROI on their very very expensive chip fabs in a market where they have typically had a lead in logic process technology at least one node ahead of their competitors historically. That advantage can be very important in mobile due to the cost and power savings vertical transistor process nodes now offer along with superior manufacturing capabilities as the scale of their other businesses has long demonstrated.

I think you have it a bit backwards, Intel would love to use their process node advantage to push their own x86 chips. But now TSMC and Samsung have 14/16nm processes up and running just like Intel, though some still argue about what's "real" and not. Since they haven't even released the 14nm Kaby Lake yet it seems Cannonlake and 10nm production is still far off while TSMC has created a 10nm test chip "Artemis" indicating they won't be far behind if at all. So because they can't stay ahead in process technology they'd rather have ARM companies make chips on Intel foundries than other foundries, more money for Intel and less money for other foundries. They wouldn't be doing it if they could keep 10nm production as an Intel exclusive.

Comment Re:Where am I being shafted? (Score 1) 42

So where am I being screwed? Is the mobile version running a lot slower, or is the desktop version just rubbish?

The GTX 1080 "mobile" solution reportedly has a TDP of 150W, the desktop version 180W so first of all it won't be in any ordinary laptop. It's a basically a die harvested version, presumably at a solid premium so price-wise I'm guessing you'll pay considerably more for the mobile version. What it does say is that nVidia could make a bigger more bad-ass card but we already knew that, but $/transistor hasn't improved as much as watt/transistor. The GTX 1080 has 7.2 billion transistors vs the GTX 980's 5.2 billion. The Tesla X that will probably be re-released as the 1080 Ti at some point has 12 billion transistors vs the 980 Ti's 8 billion.

If you overclock the future 1080 Ti by 10% (as far as I know they gimped that for the Titan X) you'd already hit the 300W ATX limit. We know though that they could make a GP100 size consumer card, 15.3 billion transistors in 610 mm^2 and probably a 350W+ TDP. However it'd be twice the size of the 1080 and with worse yields you'd probably be looking at a $1500 price tag. It's the kind of GPU you'd pair with Intel's $1700 ten core extreme edition CPU, for people who have enough money to just not care. Not that I really care at this point, my friends and I are having the most fun in Overwatch at the moment and that you can play on almost anything.

Comment Re:Stupidity to follow: (Score 2) 209

It would probably work similarly to the UK law that can send you to jail for not handing over a password. It's up to the police to prove that you know it beyond a reasonable doubt, e.g. by showing that you had the files open recently.

Except that they don't do any of that. They just air their suspicions towards you and say It's your phone, your laptop so give us the PIN/password or else. It's about as bad as civil forfeiture in the US, guilty until proven innocent.

Slashdot Top Deals

Air pollution is really making us pay through the nose.