Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment Re:Why (Score 1) 46

I do find it confusing, yes. What's the difference between the iPad and the iPad Air? Why is the one with the 'Air' monicker not the lightest and why is the Air not the Mini? What's with the Apple Pencil support being so strange, both in model and functionality? What is a 'Liquid Retina Display' vs an 'Ultra Retina XDR' display?

I believe iPadOS 26 may have sorted this recently, but even within the range when I was looking maybe a year/18 months ago you got different software functionality too, within the same model variation, purely based on screen size. Why could I run Stage Manager on one but not the other? In fact, what the hell is Stage Manager and why can't I just float a window? All this 'amazing' multitasking - yeah, I've been doing this that since the Amiga Workbench days thank you, nothing new except the weird insistence that it's somehow tied to screen layouts.

, As I say, I think iPadOS 26 has cleaned a bit of the functionality side up so some of my complaints on the OS side are now a little out of date, but I was literally standing in the shop with money to burn and I walked out since I was too confused and knew I'd always think I'd missed out somehow. These days I'm not so fussed about one anyway, though I do look in once in a while. I bought the original, iPad 2 and "the new iPad" (ridiculous name). Haven't bought any since, still have my iPad 2 but barely charge it - useful for a few hardware synths I have once in a blue moon.

Comment Re:Why (Score 1) 46

Agreeing with you and pointing out their worse offender - the iPad range. I have absolutely no idea the differences between their products there, it makes very little sense to me. And I've been using Apple products for 40 years.

Feels like the new Amelio era to me - ship what we've got in the parts bin and call it a strategy. Too many products.

Comment I mean - most of them are local first (Score 3, Interesting) 100

HomeAssistant's main strength is in tying otherwise incompatible devices together. Local first is not unique though - HomeKit is local, Matter is local, I don't know much about the Alexa/Google setups but I believe they can be controlled locally too.

Don't get me wrong, Home Assistant is an excellent bit of kit with lots of standardisation and automation. But this article is pushing the wrong part of its strengths - local-first isn't unique. Pick the right ecosystem and it's all local-first anyway.

I have many different smart vendors in my home - Google (originally Nest), Philips, Meross, Aqara, Eve, Ikea, LightwaveRF, Shelly, Eufy, Switchbot...none of them require the internet. All of them can work locally. All of them work in the same ecosystem. Then I have oddities which I use HomeBridge for to bridge the gap - Roomba (older, non-Matter, Worx Landroid (robot lawnmower), Dyson Hot'n'Cool thingy, Logitech Harmony...even plugins for Synology which show the NAS's temperature and allow shutdown. Through the use of HomeBridge, I can draw them into the same ecosystem too. None of this requires the internet.

The meme is completely overblown and quite often you can tell by people that don't actually use this kind of tech. Obviously if I want to control this kit from outside the home then I need an internet connection, and if I want to update any of the kit then I need to download the updates from the internet for that too, but operation from within the house? Just a HomeKit/Matter hub, that's all.

Comment Re: Has Climate Doom Modeling Turned Into Clickbai (Score 1) 130

Sorry - as a full-blown human-caused climate change believer, I am also old enough to remember being told that we were in an inter-ice age era and that it would end in my lifetime. I'm in the UK, and I clearly remember a school textbook with drawn pictures of Trafalgar Square fully iced up. This would be early 80s.

Let's not deny that bad information has been given in the past. Bad information is also likely being given today, and will be tomorrow as well. Mistakes happen. I like that this paper has been caught and do not in any way see it as a problem.

Comment I'm already playing x86 games on ARM (Score 4, Informative) 44

I'm seeing a lot of scepticism in the posts, whereas in fact this approach works really well. I'm going to use the example of the Mac - Rosetta 2. I play games running x86 code all the time on my M2 ARM chip, and it's not really noticeable at all. Taking exactly the same approach and applying it to Linux - yep, why on earth not? Already proven to work well.

Comment For anyone from the UK who likes this stuff... (Score 3, Insightful) 17

...consider listening to One Person Found This Helpful", a BBC radio comedy show about absurd reviews for often even more absurd products. Surprisingly good show.

For anyone not from the UK...not sure if you can access it, but even if you can you're going to need to make your way through a full-on Birmingham accent. Godspeed, you brave intrepid souls.

Comment Re: Raise the costs even more! (Score 2) 54

You're thinking DRAX which yes, as it stands is definitely not a net-positive. But DRAX is normally excluded as they usually report on 'wind and solar'. If someone in government wants to look good with a pie chart with bigger numbers then yes - DRAX gets put in. But for the energy industry itself, it's reported differently.

Comment Re: Raise the costs even more! (Score 2) 54

It's the reverse. Green electricity is held back from adoption because the price is linked to the price of gas. While ever that link exists, electricity will be unnaturally expensive in comparison to its raw market price.

It's not completely irrational, although arguable (I would be on this point of view for instance) it's now out of date. The idea is to pick the most expensive bid price for the spot market price, not the cheapest, in order to incentivise continued operation of difficult energy sources. Why would you want to? Because in ye olden days 'difficult' were things like the hydro power or nuclear which were great for maintaining base line load and which you wanted to subsidise to keep going.

In today's market, that's completely on its head and renewables are the cheapest. Established nuclear second, granted construction costs of new nuclear make that overall cost higher of course. This is why the government is incentivising pushes towards heat pumps etc. - the more we get off gas, the less reason to maintain this market oddity exists and it can be removed making electricity cheaper again.

This is easier said than done. Much of the UK's housing stock would need improvement before heat pumps are viable. I recently had a survey on my own house for instance, and it came back as non-viable without a lot of improvements around heat loss first. These improvements would be a good thing and are semi-subsidised, but it's still effort. I believe the new build rules have finally, years late but finally, been changed to require standards around heat pumps and solar.

So yep - electricity being expensive in the UK is not due to the renewables or nuclear, it's due to gas. And the reason we still rely on gas so much is inertia plus building standards and upgrades. Hard one to unpick, but got to start somewhere.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Religion is something left over from the infancy of our intelligence, it will fade away as we adopt reason and science as our guidelines." -- Bertrand Russell

Working...