If you show a nonprogrammer a screen which has a user interface which is 100% beautiful, they will think the program is almost done.
People who aren't programmers are just looking at the screen and seeing some pixels. And if the pixels look like they make up a program which does something, they think "oh, gosh, how much harder could it be to make it actually work?"
Today, if you want to stick with El Capitain, you can run that on a 9 year old Mac.
How can you install it? It's no longer visible on the App Store. Is there a way to order a physical disc?
Multi-stream transport over Thunderbolt. Basicallly split the screen in half, so each stream is under the maximum bandwidth.
Each stream = 1 display.
But I'm having trouble believing this thing can do TWO 5k displays simultaneously at 60Hz. According to the review on Ars Technica, the first Thunderbolt controller has four lanes of PCIe, while the second Thunderbolt controller only has 2 lanes of PCIE 3.0 = 16Gbps max bandwidth.
4k @ 60Hz requires 14Gbps, and 5k at 60Hz is 80% more pixels, so around 25Gbps. That will be closer to 30Hz on the slower controller, unless you know something I don't?
Crime like rape and fraud? Running a private email server isn't a crime, I find it bad judgement, and probably breach of protocol, which would typically warrant some type of scolding from her former boss, but as all email was handed over, nothing to see here.
Now, for the rape, grouping and fraud charges, these are actual crimes of a bit more serious magnitude...
Yup, checked in on it, you are dead on.
The cables have an ID chip in them that will specify their rating as to amps and voltage, plus a few other things. If you read my USB-PD story linked above, you will get the details. In short both ends start at the USB base and negotiate up their capabilities for voltage and amperage for send, receive, or both. They will do this within the bounds of the cable connecting them, and while both sides have limited capabilities to sense the cable properties, they really depend on the USB-PD ID chip.
This ID chip is of course counterfeit-proof, something we know that low end manufacturers are not capable of cloning or getting around in, oh, say, 12 seconds. So in short DO NOT BUY CHEAP/NO-NAME USB-PD CABLES FROM EVEN A POSSIBLY QUESTIONABLE SOURCE. Amazon, I am looking at you. Really. 100W = big fire quickly.
Basically yes, but not necessarily operating the phone circuit at optimal efficiency. I think it is engineered to charge the battery as quickly as possible while minimizing damage/degradation to the cells. The charger circuitry efficiency is a big concern too, but secondary to preserving the cell life. That said this problem is optimization on a dozen axis or more, not just A vs B.
The GN7 used QC2 from what I understand, likely because of their decision to split the GS7's SoC between QC and Samsung parts. I know that the phone version used QC2 because of lowest common denominator support and I am fairly sure that carried over to the Note.
That said the problem with the GN7's fires was not a battery defect but a manufacturing/assembly problem where the batteries were physically damaged and 'crimped' to the point where they internally shorted. I should be talking to someone today who probably knows if the QC-like tech has the ability to detect and stop this. I doubt it, but I am going to ask anyway.
Yes. First see what the guy below said (currently ranked 0 but worth a read), and then there is the responsiveness. USB-PD doesn't have the granularity and speed to deliver power in a way that won't hurt the battery. It can't shift quickly enough of finely enough to avoid hurting the battery. Could you do the same with USB-PD? Eventually yes, but it is really designed for charging laptops and powering big monitors, not for careful charging of mobile devices.
As was said below, you effectively have to dissipate the pressure of the firehose from USB-PD, QC3 and possibly others allow you to modify the inputs to your requirements from the source. This allows you to both match your input requirements precisely and to avoid generating heat at the source (charger) rather than on the device itself. Heat is REALLY bad for battery life, that alone makes schemes like QC3 worth it.
Think about who makes these phones. I have been in meetings where the OEM/ODM on the other side of the table looked at me and said, "that would add $.14/1000 units, totally out of the question". Don't hold your breath.
Both are fine but they don't actually address what QC3 does, they just deliver more juice. QC3 will change voltage in 200mV increments on the fly, allow 2 chargers for lower temps and better heat distribution, and actively monitor the battery for conditions which degrade life. There is a lot more to it, but pushing more wattage through USB-PD is REALLY BAD FOR BATTERY LIFE. I wrote up some pretty in-depth articles on both USB-PD and QC3 lined below if you care.
This is the long way of saying what Google is asking for is idiotic. If you look at the size of modern batteries and the rate at which USB-C can deliver power, we are bordering on all-night charges already. If you up the delivered power via PD, you will not meet the 500 charge minimum life carriers demand thus not sell any phones. Worse yet that number is about to go to 800 really soon if it is not already there. Plus you will have people pissed off that their phone is drawing more current than the charger is supplying while plugged in and being used.
In short I question Google's sanity on this one. I am asking around to see what the official take on this is from involved parties, but I suspect the original article's take is way off base. I won't say why yet, I like to know before I mouth off publicly.
You will be successful in your work.