Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook


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

Comment Re:Is that all (Score 1) 488

It's inevitable that a certain fraction of people go off the deep edge. People are irrational, even (or perhaps mostly) people who are convinced they are entirely rational. Rationality is a fragile thing because emotion and confirmation bias are deeply woven into everyone's thinking.

For normal people are few more powerful emotional impulses than the urge to protect children. It should hardly be surprising that children come to harm from it.

Comment Re:DCMA Fair Use / Parody (Score 1) 214

Ah, but is it a parody of the copyrighted elements? That's the tack I'd take if I were Samsung's lawyer: this is not parodying Samsung's IP, it is quoting Samsung's IP in a literal, non-transformative way that is not actually parody.

Of course in my heart I'd hope to lose, but that argument is no more ridiculous than many others that have become established case law. Issues like privacy and IP are where fundamental values we have as a society cut against each other and generate innumerable weird corner cases.

Comment Re:So it appears . . . (Score 1) 177

It's not just how hard you check, but how incisively. It's easy to satisfy yourself that software's anticipated failure modes won't happen. What's tough is discovering ways of screwing up that have never happened before.

That's why there's no substitute for experience. This gets back to the very roots of rocket science: the path to success passes through many, many failures.

Comment Re:non-news is non-news (Score -1, Troll) 155

All modern NAND flash memory does "quasi-RAID".

That depends 100% on the sort of controllers & memory layouts that are involved.

Do you have specific information that Apple does this? I don't.

If not, best to be quiet.

That said, 128GB should only be 4 times faster than 32GB, so if these figures are correct then the 32GB units are also using lower spec memory.

Which again goes back to the point of what I have posted... and this article.

Comment Re:non-news is non-news (Score 4, Interesting) 155

On my shelf not three feet away I've got an early prototype of a a logic board for a system later shipped with 2, 4 or 8 flash memory chips back in 2003... a board I owned a good bit of code for. At no point was there any talk of us accessing multiple chips at a time, instead the existing sequential read/write capacity was enough for our needs.

The same goes for any embedded device today, regardless of potential # of memory chips... the manufacturer is only going to parallelize read/write access under two circumstances:

1) no one on the test team noticed them doing so,
2) there is actually a need to do so in order to boost performance... which may not be applicable across all units.

#2 breaks down as it's like putting a hardware raid controller in every PC/server mobo with multiple sata ports. Sure some % of users may end up with multiple HDs attached... why should the manufacturer pay the added cost of baking this extra speed in when it is clearly an add on (or premium upgrade) option?

Comment Re:Non-issue? (Score 1) 155

It does suck if your phone doesn't get the performance that could be achieved (and is achieved by other phones) but I'm not sure what this would mean in real life.

You must not be an American! *the previous point being pointed out by an American.

Do you need this performance on a mobile device such as a phone?

Need? Since when were the bill of rights, general contract law or general mobile phone performance specifications based on 'need'?

As the data transfer test proved, it's not eight times slower for that, it only takes somewhat longer.

Which unfortunately will mean that a lawyer, somewhere will be hired to take this on as a case, then seek to escalate it to class action status on behalf of all of those who purchased an iPhone 7 with memory on the smaller end, believing they would have the same perf as those on the higher end... such at times is unfortunately the American way.

I thought it was normal the fewer flash chips perform worse.

In a batch of chips... there will be those which perform better or worse... normally they will either be segregated into to separate product lines (say SE vs Plus) or discarded to lessor products, or worse the trash.

Comment Re:Well... (Score 1) 155


Unlike a spinning disc/disk where assuming identical rotational speeds and platter counts... a higher capacity one is going to be able to read/write bits faster simply because they happen to land under the heads more often for a higher capacity driver than a lower capacity one... for a solid state storage device... those 'free' size 'advantages go away.

Comment Re:non-news is non-news (Score 4, Insightful) 155

Unless Apple is doing some sort of quasi RAID like read/write access against all available memory chips (vs treating them like a sequential memory space which may end earlier rather than later depending on what memory capacity you selected at purchase time)... why should a higher capacity device have faster read/write times than a lower capacity of the same generation?

If anything, this sounds like another example of Apple attempting to balkinize the market in a way favorable to them and those who are most willing and/or able to pay them the most for devices.

Comment Re:Not to Sound iIke a Snowflake... (Score 4, Insightful) 227

It's not only that. The problem with most theories of eugenics is that they draw from experience with agricultural breeding of domesticated species. Humans are not domesticated; we're a wild species with massive genetic diversity compared to, say, purebred Arabian horses.

This means that with us sexual reproduction still does what it is supposed to do: generate genetic diversity in offspring. Look at large families. You get some who are tall and some who are short; some who have Grandpa Joe's nose and others that have Grandpa John's jaw, others who get both or neither. Even with litter of pedigreed puppies you'll get one total loser and if you're lucky one champion; and pedigreed dog litters are much more alike than any set of human siblings. And that's just physical traits; in terms of interests, talents, and success there is massive variability among siblings, although there is some correlation, in part due to economic circumstances, upbringing and education.

Nature works this way because variability is good for the species, and that variability comes from combinations of genes being shuffled. Add to that the massive behavioral plasticity of our gigantic brains, and the idea that you can sample some of, say, Steve Jobs DNA for successful CEO markers is ludicrous. If you'd raised Jobs in a different family and sent him to a different set of schools, and didn't get him luck out by ending up close friends with Woz, then while he may well have been quite successful in some other way, he wouldn't have been the Steve Jobs we knew.

Of course, willingness to go along with the DNA test is a good test for one phenotypical trait: the willingness to put up with pseudo-scientific baloney.

Comment Re:Apple today, MS yesterday (Score 1) 283

My oh my... the goal posts seem to have been moved again.

I never claimed it was an OPEN standard.

No, but earlier I referred to 3.55mm jacks being "a widely used standard had won out as anyone could implement it", which does sorta meet the definition of 'open standard'.

You then brought up MFi, claiming "Sure you can! What do you think Apple's MFi Program is for? It is PRECISELY for OEMs that want to design Lightning-Compatible devices."

Which as you acknowledge now... isn't actually 100% true.

But then, neither is Zigbee.

Who said anything about Zigbee?

Both are licensed.

Just because a standard is open, doesn't mean it's cost or license free for all to use.

Going to make some DRAM? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (for royalties on the patents that cover the underlying technology).

Going to make a USB device? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (ie getting your own VID).

Going to be making a network adapter? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (for a MAC address range).

Going to be making a PC motherboard? Probably going to be some license fees to be paid (see above).

Let me say this again, and I'll try to use small words as you are clearly having comprehension issues.

An open standard allows anyone to build a product that meets the specification. Sometimes, there are licensing costs associated with it.

MFi, is not an open standard as Apple at it's sole discretion (too big of a word? option? choice?) can veto any product which it thinks would compete with it's own lines... which includes host devices.

But honestly, I don't really see a proscription in the wording of the document you linked against creating another "host" device that supported Lightning.

Read it again, it refers only to devices which plug into iPhones, iPods & iPads.

For example, I believe I saw an article for a Lightning memory stick, but I might be mistaken.

And unless they are like this one and also include a USB port, will only work with a Lightning compatible devices (ie iPhones, iPods & iPads).

In fact, there are quite a few such a devices... it's as if most of them know that because Lightning isn't a standard which will likely ever be available on non Apple hardware, that they have to add a standard plug on it as well so people can use it on devices adhering to a more common standard.

But if approached by the right entity,

If such an approach requires being the right entity, then no, it weakens any semblance of openness of MFi wrt host devices.

Apple really might let a Lightning connector exist on a competitor's device.

Might? And what possible evidence is there of such a thing?

Yes, I believe that could happen.

No doubt you also believe in unicorns and that 9/11 was an inside job.

Slashdot Top Deals

Yes, we will be going to OSI, Mars, and Pluto, but not necessarily in that order. -- Jeffrey Honig