Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



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

Comment Thin sucks (Score 4, Insightful) 67

I'm sitting here looking at my nice Nexus 5x phone, that has a perfectly good 3.5mm jack on it. If I lose my earbuds, I can walk into most any store and buy absolutely adequate replacements for $10 or less. The Nexus 5 is already so thin that it felt funny in my hand and I had to buy a case for it that makes it thicker.

You think USB-C headphones that "will feature special multi-function processing units (MPUs)" are ever going to be $10?

Comment Re:Offer a rugged version with bonus battery life (Score 2) 333

With respect, I don't think any of that's true, but it's one of these great assertions of utter donkeyballs that, if thought about, actually leads to the truth.

Wanting a more rugged phone with a decent battery life has nothing to do with "nostalgia", and battery life is actually one of the top complaints amongst smartphone users. So why doesn't the market support that?

Well, because the market is not the same as "most smartphone buyers". Most smartphone buyers do not spend $600 on a f---ing smartphone. Most smartphone buyers spend under $200 on a device with the biggest screen they can find, and then $10 on a "case" that makes it three times as thick.

Who doesn't do this? The people who pay $600 for a phone.

What's so special about $600 phones? Is it the innards? (No) Is it the screen? Uhm.... kinda, but you're looking at a screen that probably cost Apple or Samsung a cool extra $20 to incorporate. Better camera? Ditto.

No, what's special about a $600 phone, which cost maybe $50 more to build than the $60 BLU R1 HD in my pocket, is that has a very pleasing to the eye design.

That is it. That's the difference between a very good $150 phone, and a top of the line Galaxy.

This is why, more than likely, that under $200 phone will actually be more useful than the $600 iGalaxy. It may well have on bezel buttons, resulting in a less awkward UI. It may have a removable battery, or an SD card slot, or both. It may well have dual SIM support.

It may even have a battery that lasts more than eight hours before spluttering out.

The majority of smartphone users want better batteries, features, robustness, and we really don't care about how slim it is. But the majority of smartphone users are barely profitable, with tiny single digit percentage margins. So they literally don't care about us: they care about that minority that's willing to pay $600 for a phone with a build cost of well under $200.

And that minority is the group that wants paper thin phones.

Comment Re:Fear is a good thing for business (Score 1) 296

How is it that someone working in a sweatshop is exploiting them?

Let's ask the dictionary, shall we?

Exploitation: the action or fact of treating someone unfairly in order to benefit from their work.
"the exploitation of migrant workers"
synonyms: taking advantage, abuse, misuse, ill-treatment, unfair treatment, oppression
"the exploitation of the poor"

Comment Re:somewhere in between (Score 1) 12

Not really what I'm getting at. Congress and the Senate are a bunch of establishment politicians. They're only going to try to impeach someone if there's a good reason, or if they don't think the current occupant is there legitimately - ie isn't one of them.

I think Clinton will spend the next four years the same way she spent the last four, being investigated multiple times by Congress over non-scandals. But, if she really is the establishment politician her opponents claim, she'll have an easier time than Obama.

There's no doubt she wants to be part of the establishment, I just don't think she is, and I think she knows that too.

Comment Re:Commodore engineers (Score 1) 285

The 68000 presented a 32 bit ABI, but was internally a 16 bit CPU and presented a 16 bit data bus. The 68000 Amigas (1000, 500, 2000, "1500", etc) used a 16 bit data bus, even when they had a "real" 32 bit 68xxx CPU card installed. As a result, it is reasonable to talk about the 68000 range of Amigas as 16 bit.

Technically, you could also call the A3000 a 16/32 bit hybrid, as the ECS side (complete with chip RAM) was still accessed via a 16 bit pipe.

Comment Re:Commodore engineers (Score 1) 285

I'm going to dissent on the memory protection thing for three reasons: first, technical: CAOS probably wouldn't have been as efficient, expandable, and pleasant as AmigaOS assuming it made a serious attempt to implement memory protection. AmigaOS was those things because it had a message passing architecture that relied upon each process being able to see each other process's data. This worked throughout the entire system, device drivers passing disk blocks to file systems ("handlers"), in turn passing that data to running programs.

The first Amiga designs also barely supported memory protection. The A1000 had hardware in it (which I don't believe was part of the core Amiga chipset) to write protect a block of memory, but that was it.

The second problem is that CAOS was ditched for AmigaOS with Tripos for a very good reason that would have also hit Atari - it was too big a project, and they had a deadline to meet.

The third is we kinda know what choice Tramiel would have made to deal with the deadline issue, because we know what he did for his own Amiga rival: he would have said "We don't need some Unix like system, people are using PCs, they're happy with single tasking and 8.3 filenames. Let's see what Microsoft's rival Digital Research can sell us"

And the Amiga would have run TOS - essentially a first draft of DR's DOS Plus operating system, with GEM.

I do agree that Atari's management would have worked better for it in the longer term, but I think Atari's Amiga A1000 would have been a whole lot worse than Commodore's.

Comment Re:GAO is right (Score 1) 282

You do not DNS is just the first IP address your computer goes to when resolving a name back to an IP address. You have no power over my computer's DNS request, the entire United States of America has no power over my DNS address preferences be that 8.8.8.8 or 208.67.222.222 or 192.231.203.132 .

That DNS is nothing much of anything and pretty much just a nickname matcher. In fact they can pretty readily cut back on it's import by listing the IP address with the nickname in the address window of the browser.

Either the US surrendered it or the rest of the world was going to take it anyhow by simply legislating that ISPs point their DNS request to a local state controlled DNS servers, done and finished. Those states are run by idiots.

Once any multi-national ISP gets big enough, it will scrap everyone else's DNS nickname servers and force it's customer to use in house DNS servers and auction of all the domain names again and it is quite legal for them to do so.

Slashdot Top Deals

The most important early product on the way to developing a good product is an imperfect version.

Working...