Missing something OBVIOUS!
They're doctors, likely with iPhones and iPads (hence an iApp), but most importantly, likely a Mac at home. This means they likely Apple(Command)+V'ed and not control+V as the text humorously suggests.
1032 posts • joined 23 Sep 2009
They're doctors, likely with iPhones and iPads (hence an iApp), but most importantly, likely a Mac at home. This means they likely Apple(Command)+V'ed and not control+V as the text humorously suggests.
@Fogcat (regarding his "giggle" link: http://www.highendcable.co.uk/Nordost%20ODIN%20Speaker%20Cable.htm)
You do realize that your link was to >>>analog<<< speaker cables which is an ENTIRELY different argument, right?
"...so the cause is simple things like insecure footings, and inadequate safety equipment."
Just like getting exposed to this puddle would be bad "footing" and "inadequate safety equipment" as well. If Windmills were designed like nuclear reactors, They'd be fenced off a mile out, they'd be surrounded by a concrete wall, have a pyramid shape (for extra stability), and the workers wouldn't be able to climb the unit to service the turbine in the first place.
The erase lifetime is about 10x what it was before, lending to about 35k P/E cycles.
Also, am I the only one that noticed the Samsung quote was only regarding write speeds, but that the poor-at-researching author applied a boost to the read speeds, as if they were mentioned? Reads don't go from 500MB/s to 600MB/s just because sequential writes go up by 20%....
I'm I the only one who noticed that Microsoft's canned statement said "Hotmail" instead of "Outlook"?
Yep, thought so...
Since it's for a non-profit, check out TechSoup.org. Great way to get the licensing you need for Hyper-V servers or just the fat Win7 VMs that run on whatever Virt solution you want.
To be fair to the OP, in context: "They compare notes all of the time and I have never heard Newegg mentioned." He's emphasizing that Newegg never came up as the cheapest source for electronics, which is true. But then again, they don't ship from Hong Kong (except their new Asian marketplace), and they're trustworthy. I'm sure I could find rather cheap electronics on eBay and buy there....but why would I?
I have to practice politics every day too. You've had to deal with a wider range, due to the nature of contract work. I, like yourself, tend to end up implementing compromised solutions IRL, because that is exactly how the world works. With office politics, as with armchair quarterbacking on the internet, you recommend the more-ideal solution first, then let it get whittled and compromised down into the end result. But yes, it is the sysadmin's (or more accurately, the CIO/CTO's job) to emphasize disadvantages or shortcomings of implementations. As a consultant, it remits to the consultant to point out those things too.
"...would take a matter of days before they demanded that production workloads started operating off of it."
You bill it as a "backup." They wouldn't, rightly, demand to run your backup copies of the network shares as a production datastore, so they should not demand a backup DB to be a production workload. It is the network admin's job to teach that.
For TPTB for automated switchover: your example of why auto failover is a Bad Thing in your case should be the exact argument against doing so. As an admin, there's a fine line to walk between "I can make it do that" and "that simply can't [shouldn't] be done." IT is as much an advisory source as it is an enabler. Just because I can set up a group of FreeNAS boxes as iSCSI targets so I can scale up my environment to 60TB doesn't mean I should, simply because TPTB demand more space, but won't pay for a SAN. Likewise, caving to each want and whim of TPTB that don't allocate proper funding to do it right (or at least "better"), is not correct. Of course, with their software, there's not much of an "ideal" way to do it. Manual failover, manual corrections in the event of DR, etc. It's just how it is, and TPTB need to understand that.
"...I'm going to guess that you don't have backups going back that far."
Actually, we keep about 2 weeks worth of daily VM backups offsite with a week lag on cycling, so actually, YES, we do keep a fair amount of backups for which at least one image per VM would be restorable even in the event "last night's" backup failed for some reason. It's not hard to do, but certainly requires a decent storage device (ours has a good 20TB in it, but easy enough for a no-budget shop like Trevor's to set up a FreeNAS to do the same thing...)
"It isn't enough to just test the DR plans; frequency of tests is an issue. A copy of the VM existed on the target site...but that copy was corrupted. Couldn't get it to boot. (Most likely an incomplete backup run at some point.)
So the DR plans were good, they were tested to inject new information and files into a known-good VM...but the known good VM turned out to be not so good. At that point, down the rabbit whole you go..."
Unless you just snag the VM copy from a previous version. But if you don't keep previous backups of your VMs, but instead overwrite each VM each night, then you're just asking for trouble. This could have been avoided if you simply had "the night before" the corrupted VM. Software that can backup using incremental rather than full also help. I'm willing to bet, though, that DFSR was the sole means of remote-site copies (which does have remote differential transfers, if you're not politically stuck on Win2003....)
"Your app needs to not blow up horribly on read-only DB instances..."
It shouldn't be a burden to remove the read-only denotation from your my.ini on your slave DB (since you're in there changing the slave bit anyway) in the event of a DR scenario to bring it up as a master. The replication was suggested to keep a nearly-live sync of your DB on a second server. Also, who said your app needs to know how to run on a read-only DB? The replication, in your case, would be solely for DR, not for active use.
"Hopefully the content makers will realise that you can't stop piracy, but you can make the paying option cheap enough and good enough (from the customer's point of view) to make the risks of pirating enough to stop all but the most hardened freetard."
You do realize that the whole point of this watermarked vid idea is to allow the customer to have a completely open, copy anywhere, backup as many times, view on whatever experience and is only meant to stop mass-sharing of the content (e.g. torrents, et al)? There are likely ways around it, such as if the watermark is some digital bits in the stream, doing a screen capture instead of pulling the raw data (or simply filtering out the bits or replacing them with other acceptable ones if it works like a software key...). The previous comment of embedding it as random one-off noise in the film, such as brightness, is a smarter idea, depending on the resiliency of being able to snatch the ID from a suitably short enough clip (there were comments of mashups to produce the whole length). Now, the download with a gift card from a coffee shop would need to be addressed, and short of a DNA sample and world-wide registrar, can still be worked around (stolen credit card numbers, etc). So no, as long as there's ways of digitally sharing data, there will be the possibility for piracy. It's just a matter of the level of acceptable mitigation.
ExaGrid is a small company that would fall under that "others" category. They have a pretty good scale-out method. Haven't used one myself in production, but was looking into them.
Put two (or three) 512GB SSDs in Intel (software) RAID0.
Drop 3 Radeon 7970s in triple XFire and hook up 5 monitors to it for multi-monitor gaming. (gives triple vid cards a reason for being used)
Definitely overclock the CPU.
Drop another 3 or 4 4TB spindle drives in there for some real media storage.
Trevor, you should pit your D-Links up against similar-class Adtran switches. I've seen that brand used in environments and would like to see your test bench hammer out their shortcomings, if any. They're also within this D-Link's price range too...
"OS Support" would imply exposing to the programmer which is volatile vs non-volatile for the programmer to decide which one to use for which task. Database servers don't eat themselves in the event of a power loss event and can resume semi-gracefully now, and we don't even have non-volatile RAM for them yet. Why would you assume we'd be worse off than we are now?
"there is no tangible benefit to DDR3 RAM frequency above 1600 MHz. as this is not a system bottleneck for typical work station or personal desktop PCs."
Actually, AMD APUs have significant graphic-subsystem gains with DDR3-2166 (or any range stepping up from the horrid DDR3-1066 that is usually shipped with cheapo PCs). Intel integrated GPUs don't benefit much, but their GFX performance is horrid (comparatively) anyway.
"so DDR4 and faster frequency hybrid DDR3+ doesn't offer any value for server applications either."
Do note that with increased frequency, your memory throughput increases. Just because current programs don't make significant use of 22Gbps throughput over 14Gbps (most machines only have 4-6GB of RAM total anyway), doesn't mean that NO program could be engineered to do so, especially with knowing there's 256GB of NAND storage hiding in a DDR4 slot (hence the OS support requirement). THAT location is where I, as a programmer, would dump my table cache that couldn't fit into actual volatile RAM, as it's guaranteed to have better throughput and access/storage speed than a spindle drive. Windows could utilize it by copying the whole OS there too. A game could make use of it by stuffing map packs, texture files, etc in there rather than leaving them on a spindle drive. Clustered systems could make significant use as well. We'll have to see. However, no one will design for it if they don't have hardware to test on, nor likelihood of adoption.
You mean that after all the app censoring, that HBO really thinks they can get their night-time soft porn onto an AppleTV device? Will wonders never cease?
This article should have been tagged with a [b]Watch This Space![/b]
And due to it being an Apple article, everyone missed the "Post-PC Era" jab. Of course, it won't be a "Post-PC Era" once everyone has a "Post-PC Device" and circles back to refresh their aging desktop/laptop. Then we'll be in the post-tablet era....
@Fuzz: If storage is a kind of memory and thus capable of being used interchangably since "no one thinks" something, does that mean we can advertise a 4GB Android device as havi g 4GB of memory, or perhaps I should sell you a desktop with 8GB of memory...that actually had 256MB of RAM with an 8GB sd card. Of course, you wouldn't be confused or misled at all, since anyone would know....
"Google managed to up the memory on the low-end model to 16GB in October."
Writer fail. "storage" =/= "memory" Should stop spending so much time reading the boxes and actually know what you're writing about.
So, you bought a Nexus 7 for $199. A new, slimmer one comes out just a while later that is thinner, sexier, etc for $199. You buy it, now you're out $400 total, but have TWO tablets now. And you're roughly out the same price getting just the single low-speced iPad would have cost (iPad Mini is selling around $350 for the low-storage model).
My corp firewall does SSLVPN. Should try using it sometime. Might just fix your problem. Unless you deployed a substandard device....
The worst part about QA, is how extensively have they QAd it? I've ran across loads of code that wouldn't have passed a proper desk-check, let alone unit testing. That's the code that needs to be touched.
The option to do Whole-Disk Encryption in TrueCrypt will encrypt the hibernation file as well. You are required to enter your decryption key upon start-up/resume, where it then decrypts the boot volume (with the hibernation file) and then continues to boot as normal. So even Hibernation with whole-disk encryption is safe for TrueCrypt installs.
Very much so here too. Storage XenMotion will be a great boon for us to shift VMs around when necessary.
Apple doesnt have patents beforehand, they take existing tech and repatent them. Therefore, Apple is currently preparing to patent said combined system...on a capacitive device...with rounded corners.
I think you missed the metric of these 4TB drives being 3.5" whereas your "60 drives in 4U" is for 2.5" drives....
"So it can't ever be quite as reliable as proper server-room storage with a proper backup strategy."
It isn't meant to be. It's for a small-biz of 6 workstations in Windows Workgroup mode needing shared storage. Setting up a workgroup share on the "boss's" computer isn't resilient enough. Buying a server with enough data storage is still going to be a single point of failure in an office where they likely can't even properly manage their own workstation failures. If you're reading this website, chances are you already exceed the mental capacity to run this software.
I'm just going to be laughing next year as the iPhone5 becomes so woefully behind the times (it already is behind [some] at launch this year), that even sales people have a hard time justifying selling it over an Android/WinPhone8 (yes, a WinPhone will be in the running by then, and may even be a better option than Apple BION). Frankly, I'm not surprised that even the people I know that rushed out to upgrade their 4S to the 5 lost that cold, mindless look in their eyes when they beheld the utter lack of change/function/feature in their new expensive gadget.
So IE8 users on XP may or may not be able to use Google Docs or YouTube. Gmail may eventually stop working 100% properly. Google search? I bet they keep IE8 alive on that due to marketing considerations. Nothing will outright break day1 with this "change." It may just partially break a year down the road after some new feature comes out. You act like it has the finality of a due-date for Apple pulling an app from the App Store or something.
Last I checked, a line-by-line code audit actually helps to streamline code and fix bugs (especially if you have to interpret it into another programming language). Unfortunately, it can also cause bugs since the "streamlining" process may cause typo or logic errors while they're attempting to condense or fix code. So, it's likely a wash on the other end, or leans more toward bugs (as it's new, untested code whereas the old code was battle-hardened).
It's been well demonstrated it was the poor choice in thermal compound under the heat spreader that made Ivy Bridge "run hot." Although, I must say that my IB i7 OCed to a modest 4.4Ghz has a 53.3*C (128*F) package temp, 37.2*C (99*F) core temp (according to AIDA64). On air (and no, not the turbine/jet engine kind). The cores don't generate much heat comparatively, it just gets bottle-necked getting through to the heat-spreader.
Oh, and 5% is actually closer to "3 to 15%" depending on your application.
@h4rm0ny: "Why on earth would you need a 720p screen on something that is 4"?"
I would actually like to see my webpages, not have some 500x100 header image or some such nonesense (register title image perhaps?) throw everything off the low-res screen TYVM. I suffered on a low res screen and it made web browsing terrible. 1280x800 gives a normal rendering so I can find what I need and move on with life. Not all of us are blind.
So, they're calling the mini-dock a "Lightning" connector? Isn't this the same term AMD uses for their Thunderbolt-alike DisplayPort technology? I think someone may be getting sued shortly....
These spec lines read rather underwhelming. Not even a full 720p screen? Seriously? At least they finally got the camera to 8MP like all the Androids. The list of features they're enumerating to merit the "iOS6" tag sound more like the list of features you'd read about in Sense, Motion, or other GUI mods from manufacturers. Task switching, GUI overhaul, hardware-accelerated 3D, and SMP ALL TOGETHER may merit a full version bump, but being able to tweet from the notification pulldown and throwing a few app upgrades in merits iOS5->iOS6? Guess they're on the Firefox versioning system now: numbers for the sake of numbers.
All because of mandated ethanol and a bad yield year....
"Yep, same old UI. That one the customers love, and know how to use..."
Ignorant customers love it. Pull out an Android phone and show them homescreen widgets (such as your email inbox or your calendar) and they instantly go "wow! that would be great to have!" Sure, you can launch an App, perhaps have to wait for it to open/load depending on your iOS, but having it on the homescreen is very convenient. We'll see how long until Apple steals widgets like they did the notification pulldown...
The only valid point you give is the "know how to use." Swapping a UI in a major way (Ribbons, in your example, or the Not-Metro UI of Win8) is a major problem. However, the transition can be done, and it can sometimes be fairly painless. Look at how Android added a task manager in 3.0+. I'm not a big fan of the permanent black bar on their Tablets, but the phone execution of 4.0 tasks is flawless. Apple could do the same if they tried.
Just use the Intel Z77 caching feature. Does the same thing transparently.
@AC: "Android phones of a similar quality are not much if at all cheaper than an iPhone on contract."
Nope. You can get a Galaxy Nexus for less than an iPhone 4, along with many other Android devices. Perhaps the reason more Android devices are sold is because they are more multifunctional? Heck, just having an SD slot means I have 64GB (32 internal, 32 on card) in my phone, with the option of 32/64 for a total of 96GB (plus the spare 32GB I can swap back in when needed). That capability along makes an Android device loads better than any iDevice for portable media storage and having 1080p recording space.
@Metavisor: It's not in dispute that Samsung "copied" Apple. It IS in dispute, however, that the things they "copied" were truly novel and patentable (as demonstrated by all of the prior art provided, which apparently didn't amount to a hill of beans in the jury's opinion).
"...that Samsung had failed to present clear and convincing evidence that the patent was invalid."
Yeah, unfortunately, a mountain of prior art isn't enough to invalidate patents such as multi-touch or rectangular objects with rounded corners...
A big problem would be multiple users... Watching Discovery nature show that you don't like? Flips to Teletubbies! Or worse yet, it knows that you immediately flip from child shows (except when it's the kids watching), and the "Don't like this?" logic comes around and *flick* Oh look, now your kids are watching soft porn on HBO....
Doesn't even matter if Moto used them or not (they may well have). Just ask Patent Trolls.
On the article however, it digresses into the whole FRAND crap again at the bottom. These 7 patents do not appear to be related to FRAND in any way, and thus, Moto could extort $30/device licensing fees if they so desired (coincidentally, that's how much Apple wanted to extort from Samsung to use a rounded-corner rectangular form factor...)
"I certainly wouldnt mind a car with half the range if it cost half as much to run."
"Wouldn't that mean it costs the exact same amount, then?"
@NukEvil: Nope. Half as much to run, at half the distance, is still half as much to run, you just get less range per fill-up. If it was half as much to run over half the range (note the change in word order and the use of "over"), then you're just saying it costs less due to reducing the distance driven.
1080p vs not, all I gotta say is my phone camera recording 720p (or worse), it's hard to make out gravel as anything more than a mixed-shade blur. 1080p, you can see rocks.
That is all.
It's quite easy to hit an "All-time low" if your stock hasn't been around enough to have taken "the plunge" before....Shame Facebook's stock looks more like a park slide than a rollercoaster...
From the article:
"Dealers sometimes try to make fake profiles harder to detect by randomly following some famous and some average people, or posting tweets grabbed from the Twitter stream."
Note the "randomly following some famous...people." What would be interesting is the unsaid: if Obama had any fake followers too. If the article's statement is to be assumed true, the accounts may be following one, the other, or both.