* Posts by Trevor_Pott

6179 posts • joined 31 May 2010

Desktop Linux users beware: the boss thinks you need to be managed

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

VDI Linux at what I am presuming at speeds over the WAN that can compete with PCoIP or RDP? It's like my birthday. I'm so happy. I might even cry.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Sincerely, and with great happiness, THANK YOU, VMware.

2
4

Apple CEO Tim Cook: My well-known gayness is 'a gift from GOD'

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

...I don't know about you, but I'm proud to like boobies. Boobies are good.

2
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: This thread is being pre-modded.

"Is it a fact that El Reg note a significant number of abusively homophobic postings when this kind of story is published?"

Yes. Or at least, so the subeds have told me. There are days, sir, when their depression and despair for the path of humanity leaps across instant messenger and takes form.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Who cares?

"I couldn't give a damn if someone is Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transexual, Hetrosexual, white, black, coloured, male, female, disabled, non-disabled or what ever label people feel the need to apply to someone as long as they are not a complete ars*h0le and they do their job to a minimum standard"

Two items:

1) Disabilities cost more to accommodate. They may limit what a person can do or increase the costs of them being able to do so. Employer and employee need to be aware of these limits and costs. Surprises lead to anger, and that's bad for everyone.

2) Transgender individuals can cause a bit of a fracas around "what bathroom they use". This could be due to transphobia of other staff, union/muni/province/federal laws or simply an out-of-date corporate bylaw system. It is best to do the research to ensure both employer and employee know the rules and have in place a means of dealing with complaints.

So some care has to be given to the individual's differentiation from others. We are not interchangeable blocks.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: There are no words...

"I am so disenfranchised I could not overcome my desire to post about my disenfranchisement with this news" would seem to convey the sentiment adequately.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Seems to have been an 'open scret'

"now he's officially out you may find use of the term 'Fruity Firm' comes with unfortunate implications"

...why? Is "fruity" actually considered perjorative? I thought it was one of those terms that the gay community had "owned". At least, the few gay friends I have make "fruit" jokes all the time, refer to company that cater to gays as "fruity" and love riffing on Apple as the "fruit" factory on about 12 different levels of meta.

I never can keep up with what terms are supposed to be offensive these days. It seems as soon as we collectively settle on either a slang term or an official term for a given group someone cries "that's offensive" and we have to go make up a new term.

The latest one to bite me being that apparently we can't refer to "people descended from those individuals who violently came across the land bridge in the {at least second} migration, murdered most of the peoples from the first migration (excepting the Innu) and populated the Americas" as "Natives" or "Native Canadians". It must be "First Nations", otherwise it's offensive. And then someone else spoke up and said "no! First Nations is offensive, we should be..."

I didn't hear the rest, it all devolved into shouting.

Does anyone know of an official list of current politically correct terms for various demographics, preferably with a per-country, or even per-administrative-region breakdown so that we can keep track of this all?

*sigh*

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Good for him!

"I'm delighted he's free to do what he wants, but equally I have no wish to know about it."

I want even less to know what you want, and I care only enough to dislike you.

4
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Good for him

Your religion offends me, sir.

I ask that you not practice it in front of me.

4
2

Facebook OCP crowd to ogle MICROSOFT'S server-room SECRETS

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: I'll save you some time...

MS are primarily a software mobile first, cloud first company that are desperately trying to get out of the business of supplying any software that doesn't come with a subscription license.

T,FTFY

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Thank you, Microsoft.

0
0

Keep up with the fast-moving world of flash array storage

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Understand Your workloads first

When considering spinning rust even as a possibility you need to go beyond "modelling". You need to ask yourself "how gracefully does this degrade"? "What will happen if my requirements suddenly spike?" Most importantly of all: "how heavy is the weight dangling above my sensitive bits if performance should spike and the DRAM cache should start diverting requests to the disks"?

Flash starts looking very good, very quickly.

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Cache

DRAM cache is never the solution to a disk array. Fucking. Never. Oh, life's good until you run out of bloody cache, then you're not going from DRAM to NAND, you're going from DRAM to crushing up flowers and smearing the walls with the results.

Disks are slow and horrible. They are a last resort, nothing more. Every time you have to read or write directly to disk you have failed. And if the only think between your application and those disks is DRAM, you are setting yourself up for failure at the moment of highest demand...right when you need it to just work more than you've ever needed it to do so before.

0
2

Big Content outs piracy hotbeds: São Paulo, Beijing ... TORONTO?

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Someone beat me to markham.

Can't argue with that, I've gotta be a prime example!

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Someone beat me to markham.

"you and I might not accept the TPP without a fight, but it sure as shit looks like Stephen Harper is buying it, lock, stock, barrel *and* ball gag."

Harper's time is up.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

"In the US, internet piracy is a criminal matter. Has been since the NET act. Don't know about Canada."

Civil matter in Canda. With the maximum combined fine an individual can pay for copyright infringement being $5000.

It's the proper balance. If you are caught committing copyright infringement you get a fine that hurts - and hurts a lot, for the poor - but not so much that it ruins your life.

But there is no "$150k per infringement" crap. And you don't pile infringement upon infringement to achieve millions of dollars worth of monies due. You cough up $5k, the artists at least get something out of the deal and the life of the copyright infringer isn't ruined.

And the content MAFIAA hate this. Thus the TPP demands.

5
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

They're just bitter we have a sane and rational made in Canada copyright solution and won't bend over and take the US's TPP copyright demands with a smile and a thank you.

9
0

Remember Internet2? It's now a software-defined metacloud

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

It's more than just VPN. It's layer 2 extensibility across links.

0
0

Carders offer malware with the human touch to defeat fraud detection

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: My golden rule since my card was cloned at a Texaco petrol station

"The wife" is similar to "the boss", except that if there is a conflict between "the boss" and "the wife" the wife wins.

To be more succinct: "my wife" would indicate that I own her, or at least that we're equals. "The wife' indicates that she owns me. And she does. I am her possession, she is in charge and I do not question this.

1
0

Storage array giants can use Azure to evacuate their back ends

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Well done, Microsoft!

An excellent feature, aimed at the right target market. Enterprises will benefit from this.

0
0

Bad dog: Redmond's new IE tool KILLS POODLE with one shot

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Grumble, moan.

SSL = ancient. TLS = slightly less ancient and currently in use.

0
0

Hate the BlackBerry Z10 and Passport? How about this dusty old flashback instead?

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Hmm. This is the first phone that's seriously interested me in a while...

4
1

Microsoft unwraps new auto data-protection in Office 365 tools

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

HA! Well, I've done weirder things while waiting for servers myself. Can't complain with that logic. :)

0
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

...why did you do the math on that? I mean, just...you have too much time on your hands.

1
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

No, my position is slightly more nuanced.

What Microsoft have built is good, provided it is very carefully marketed and positioned and what it can and can't do spelled out clearly at multiple points so that nobody is given false hope, intentionally or not. I'd go so far as to say that the word "prevention" probably shouldn't be used here. Maybe "data leak/loss resistance." Think "fire proof" versus "fire resistant".

This will mean lost sales as people who might have been bamboozled don't buy. It will also mean some others will buy anyways, and combine solutions.

None of that takes away from the solid technical work done. The problem to hand is a hard problem to solve. And, quite frankly, I honestly believe that Microsoft have done the hardest part of this in the creation of their existing technologies.

What remains is more political than technological. Zero-knowledge encryption of Azure + Office 365 can be implemented without too much fuss. They choose not to, nor to even discuss why. And if their government did turn around and tell them "you can't do that", then yes, I would say they should serious consider packing up and leaving.

I don't have a problem with the technology Microsoft is offering. I think it is good technology. But I absolutely have a problem with how it is generally marketed, how the PRs present it to journos, and how every bit of training information focuses on "look at all these features, wow!" but spend little (if any) time being clear about what it can't and won't do.

The issue here is highly political. The tech is a good start, but it is resistance-class, not prevention class. Overselling is likely to do way more harm than good.

And ultimately, it is half assed. The endgame solution required involves making some tough choices to stick up for the customer in the face of massive political pressure to do otherwise. Microsoft is out there putting hundreds of millions into trying to convince us that they're "the good guy", and that technologies like DLP "demonstrate their commitment to privacy and security".

If people start to believe that tripe - and judging by the commenters in this forum, more than a few do - then that is dangerous. And that's where the half-assedness of this whole thing absolutely becomes a real concern.

The code can be respect-worthy while the corporate positioning of the product - and for that matter, the company's overall stance across a line of products - is dangerous. And thus we have a very typical Microsoft situation in which the technology is praiseworthy but the solution (notably, how it is ultimately presented in virtually all official content on the subject) is half-assed.

I don't see any of the above as "steam rising". If anything, it fills me with a sens of...I don't know...defeat. Tired acceptance. Depression. A loss of faith in humanity, even. The sort of feeling of abject impotence and helplessness one feels when they learn that another umpteen billion dollars was squandered by politicians.

I don't have the zeal to be passionate about anything any more, sir. I have the outrage fatigue, and it's largely why I confine my thoughts on the matter to forums nobody cares about and nobody reads.

Donning the armour, saddling Rocinante and making another pass at the damned windmill just isn't in me anymore. I report what I see. I vent my thoughts into the feckless void of El Reg's forums where noone of consequence will see. That's all there is.

Crusades and causes are a game for the young.

2
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Whereas I think that trying to do this piecemeal is worse than not doing it at all. Address the whole of the issue or don't bother. Make people go elsewhere to other vendors that will address the whole of the issue.

But Microsoft's half-assed approach gives a false sense of security, especially when combined with aggressive marketing that is making their DLP seem like it far more than it is. If you have a half-assed solution, be up front about it. But they aren't, really. Not unless you're an uber-nerd and prepared to pour over every least bloody stitch of information on the topic.

So I accuse Microsoft - and others - of shoddy half measures, whilst trying to market as being adequate. It's not. Not by a long shot. And, like shitty antivirus vendors (oh, wait, Microsoft again!) that do things half-assedly, they do far more harm than good by giving a false sense of security.

Shit or get off the pot. But I'm sick of gigacorps half-assing this. It's too important to let them get away with it.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

No, I'm talking about DLP as it is being talked to me. DLP in conjunction with tagging at the OS level, mobile security, endpoint security etc. Whatever the term may have been used for, it is being expanded by Microsoft's own marketing droids to cover a more generic "who can access your data, and how".

This seems to be including new proposed offerings like "only allowing certain forms of content to be viewed inside DRMed, tracked online applications" etc. The thing is, if you are going to from "tagging and alerting things as they leave exchange" to "access monitoring and control across the entire data life cycle" (which is absolutely what I am being told is what this term is supposed to now encompass) then I don't think that you can simple "wish away" the threat of malicious actors MITMing (or PATRIOT acting) your data whilst on it's way to, or stored in, the cloud.

So: DLP is either very narrowly "transport rules in exchange" or it is "data lifecycle management" in it's totality. You don't get to pick an choose which aspects of data security and access control you cover just because some of them make you uncomfortable, or you find them inconvenient.

Since Microsoft seem to pushing "DLP" as "more than just exchange transport rules" then I say they've failed until they've addressed all aspects of data lifecycle management.

0
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Yes and no. DLP is technologically an expansion of Exchange transport rules...but ties into stuff baked into Windows Server 2012, InTune and EMM as well.

More to the point, the purpose is to allow enterprises to control who views their data, and under what circumstances. It has aimed to become far more than just "exchange transport rules". As such, we must look to solutions beyond exchange transport rules to solve the goal of DLP:

allowing companies (and ultimately, individuals) to control who can see their data, and under what circumstances. And that goes back to needing a "security first, privacy first" approach to things, from the start. No band-aids.

As for "US.gov will make it illegal not to have back doors"...oh well. If they want to footbullet themselves, go right ahead. Microsoft has the choice to keep their HQ in the US. As do all these other companies. They aren't standing up for our rights by rolling over and complying. Why should I trust my business to them, or hand them my money?

Oh, because "America, fuck yeah?" America: fuck off.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

DLP stuff is nice, but I still don't trust my data residing in the American cloud. When will Microsoft offer complete and total zero knowledge encryption such that they - but especially the NSA - cannot get at any of the data stored in Azure, Office 365, etc? And when will this be enabled as a standard option, available to everyone?

Will they encrypt my user data that's being streamed to them from Windows 8/8.1/10 as part of their integration into the OS? What about Onedrive? How do we lock down all that search data sent to Bing such that nobody I don't want can see it? When will that be the default option?

DLP is a great tool, and kudos to Microsoft for doing shedloads of excellent and very difficult work to advance the state of the art in this area. But what's needed is a true "security first, privacy first" approach that goes far - far - beyond what DLP can ever offer.

3
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Hahahaha

Hi, Office files can generally be recovered after a crash in a manner similar to that discussed here. Hope that helps.

1
0

'GCHQ's surveillance data gulp is BULKY and WARRANTLESS', human rights groups moan

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Raise your hand....

The ends justify the means, eh?

12
3

Schneier, Diffie, ex-MI5 bod, privacy advocates team up on Code Red

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Time for the downvotes, I guess

Would my military or police suppress the citizens and back an autocratic state? No. But I'm Canadian. Would yours?

Ferguson.

America is rotten to the core. And I honestly believe your military, national guard and federal policing units would stand with the state, not the people. They've already been trained for decades in "us versus them". Your local Sheriff is just a Sheriff. His revolver and his shotgun mean nothing against the awesome power of an Apache helicopter.

Sorry man, you just live in the wrong country for "the people" to have a say. Probably for generations to come.

2
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Time for the downvotes, I guess

That tired old saw. In the days when the power of an armed citizen roughly equaled that of an armed soldier, I'd agree with you. Even when it took two or three regular citizens to overcome the training of each soldier.

Today, you can "pacify" 30,000 people with a HumVee and a microwave cannon, or simply wipe them out by the tens of thousands with helicopters, daisy cutters or machine gun grenade launchers.

I don't care how many M16s you have on your insurgency shelf at home, if the state wants you dead you will be made dead. Especially if said state is a fully modern Western nation. Hell, we have freaking robots for that now. Flying ones!

Voting means nothing. Nothing at all. What matters - especially in "money is speech, corporations are people" America - is who writes the cheques. Given how much wealth is controlled by so few people, "the people" don't stand a chance to impose their will - or their oversight - no matter who they vote for.

Democracy, or even the concept of a republic, is a lie in a world where the gap of money, power and sheer force of arms between the haves and the have nots has moved from 3:1 to 300,000:1.

8
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Time for the downvotes, I guess

"as there are were real limits, real transparency, and fucking real consequences over all this. "

T,FTFY

3
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Time for the downvotes, I guess

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

4
0

Diablo boss on chipsets, ULLtraDIMM and the Netlist fracas

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: NVDIMMS

"Battery backed" versus supercap is fairly irrelevant. It's an external power source.

And no, I didn't forget that flash exists on the module, but flash isn't the primary storage interface. It's the backup data retention space. There's just enough juice in the thing to dump the contents of RAM to flash. Well...you hope, anyways. There's actually been some issues with certain NVDIMM setups of these styles losing their supercaps over time (damned TiMn supercaps!) and thus not actually having the juice to fully write out the contents of the RAM before the clock strikes 12 and it turns back into a pumpkin.

NVDIMMs have a way wider use case set than MCS. NVDIMMs are used inside SSDs (well, sort of), RAID cards, modern high-RAM Hard Disks...anywhere where you might have RAM in use for high-speed storage, but require non-volatile storage if the lights go out.

MCS isn't that. MCS is a means of hijacking the DRAM bus to provide a jumped-up version of PCI-E storage. It isn't main system memory, or even main memory for a subcomponent (like a RAID card). It's secondary (or permanent) memory. Like a PCI-E or SATA SSD.

To be more concrete:

NVDIMMs are the sort of thing you put in your RAID card so that you can have 1GB or 2GB of fast DRAM cache on on your RAID card that accelerates your array. When the power goes out, the DRAM would dump it's contents to a flash backup. When the power comes back on, it would load that data from flash, then flush it back out to the disks.

MCS is more akin to the disks that would hang off that RAID card and serve as permanent storage.

If I were designing the ultimate in "bitching systems of the future", I would use NVDIMMs as my computer's main memory and MCS as permanent storage. I could run my databases in-memory without fear, and store my operating system, application, and long-term storage in the MCS modules.

...and now I want to go build a system like that. Hot damn that sounds sexy.

0
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Dec 2 injunction

Sorry, but you are incorrect. Memory Channel Storage is presented to the system as storage. It is not presented as main system memory. Memory Channel Storage is used in a similar fashion to PCI-E storage, SATA storage or other forms of premenant storage.

NVDIMMs are presented to the system as memory. They are used by the system in the same fashion it would use volatile memory, however, it doesn't go *pffft* when the lights go out. NVDIMMs don't write to flash as the primary storage medium. It writes to RAM, then dumps that RAM into flash using an external power source when it detects a power-out event.

They serve different functions and operate in a different manner. The only similarities between the two are

A) Form factor; they both use DIMMs

B) When the power goes out, their contents end up are stored in flash

Under the hood, however, the differences far outweigh the similarities. One example: MCS can be huge compared to NVDIMMs. 400GB, 800GB or more per stick. NVDIMMs use flash as an "oh shit"-class backup medium for RAM, and thus are no bigger than the RAM they back up.

In truth, in many ways, I like the NVDIMM concept better. If only because it means you can use the things bloody forever without worrying about the write life of the flash. You will obsolete the system before the flash chips in an NVDIMM need to be worried about.

MCS? Not so much. As states in the interview, Diablo uses a bunch of consumer-level sells and "black magic" maths to wear level them. How long do they last, really? Given the high price and target (ultra-low-latency databases, etc) I have all sorts of questions about their applicability, survivability, etc. I have a list of technical testing questions a mile long before I'd ever put them into any of my systems.

Not so an NVDIMM. NVDIMMs are simple and straightforward. But htye are so because the operating principles are completely different, as is their ultimate applicability.

Putting RAM with a supercap on a PCB and giving it a SATA 3 interface is closer to being "exactly like an SSD" than MCS is to being "exactly like an NVDIMM". At least the "RAM + Supercap + SATA 3 interface" and the SSD can both only be used as permanent storage.

NVDIMMs are treated by a system more like regular RAM than they are like PCI-E or SATA storage. That's the advantage of NVDIMMs. It's why they're worth buying!

Now I could be wrong - $deity knows that happens often enough - but if that is so, please explain how. For my own erudition. How, other than in the most superficial fashion, is an NVDIMM anything like MCS at all?

Thanks in advance!

0
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Let's call a 'spade' a 'spade' - MCS is NVDIMM is NVvault

"MCS is NVDIMM is NVvault "

Explain how. Because from a technical standpoint I don't understand how at all.

NVDIMM is RAM that writes to flash only after it detects a power out event. It relies on a supplementary power source to do so.

MCS writes everything to flash immediately. It's not sitting in RAM waiting for a power off event. It goes straight to flash.

NVDIMM uses flash as emergency storage. MCS uses flash as primary storage and doesn't have an emergency storage component. They are - to my understanding at least - two completely different products with two completely different goals.

NVDIMMs are RAM modules. They behave as RAM modules. They are presented to the system as RAM modules. MCS is storage. It is presented to the system as storage...and even requires a BIOS patch to do so.

NVDIMMs are amazing and fantastic for in-memory databases, because they allow you to work at DRAM speeds, something MCS cannot do. MCS acts in a fashion very similar to PCI-E flash storage, but without the latency spikes that affect PCI-E storage at high utilization thresholds.

From practical application of the technologies right down to the nitty gritty of electrical signalling they are, to my understanding, two completely distinct products. If you claim otherwise, Please, do share how I am wrong about that fact. I like knowledge.

Next: please explain how "who opened their doors when" matters?

Also: regarding this statement: "Badalone attempts to justify Diablo's position with what would be described as grandstanding - whereas we see the Netlist CEO is more comfortable detailing the issue in court and in the Netlist's financial filings. Take a look at the SEC website for more information on Netlist / Diablo."

I both have to agree and disagree. Is Badalone grandstanding? Absolutely. But Netlist is also not answering important questions all while shedding board members. If Netlist's take on this is "please don't ask tough questions and just wait for the courts to deal with this" then that is a take I cannot sanction. The purpose of journalism is to ask the tough questions. Especially when someone doesn't want those questions asked.

Which brings me to: " Saying Netlist responded with a "canned" sentence doesn't alleviate the need to report information that counters Badalone's claims."

When I uncover any information that makes me believe for a second Netlist has a valid claim then I will gladly report on it, dissect it in detail and explain how this is likely to be a real threat to Diablo's position. I owe Diablo nothing, and care nothing for either company involved beyond gaining a deeper understanding of the technical issues and history that drives the conflict.

I am absolutely willing to do a counter interview with netlist and dive into the technical nitty gritty of their claims with them. I'd love to, in fact. For example, to understand why someone might claim that NVDIMM and MCS are "basically the same". I don't see it that way at all, and would love to be shown how I am wrong. If you know people at Netlist that can do so, please, have them contact me.

"Let's also be fair and recognize Netlist has been winning at the USPTO and in court. Big name companies have already settled (ex. TI)."

If I win a court case against someone's dog biting me, it doesn't mean that I'll win when their cat craps on my lawn. Each claim in each case is to be taken on it's own merits, no?

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Dec 2 injunction

All good questions. I'll be sure to track down the CEO of Diablo and ask.

0
1
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

No bias, just trying to understand. I have enough knowledge of the topic to have a lot of very serious technical questions about Netlist's claims. How/why do claims around what amounts to an LRDIMM count against memory channel storage, which is - at least at first glance - completely different.

The only bit that would seem to be the same is that somewhere on those chips there is a widget that allows the CPU to "talk to" more address space than it was designed to. Address conversion, if you will. Electrically and logically you need to address flash completely differently from RAM. But at the end of the day there is still some widget that is allowing you to address more memory on that bus than you should by all rights be able to.

Now, Diablo claims that they have the rights to that particular piece of tech because they, in fact, invented it. More to the point, they claim the contract lets them use that tech. Fair enough; if that's true - and we'll see soon enough, I guess - then what is Netlist on about?

So that leads into the second round of claims: IP around battery-backed DIMMs. Unless you have a patent that basically says "we patent non-volatile memory in all forms" there's nothing similar between a battery-backed DIMM and a flash DIMM. Initial research didn't show Netlist having anything like such an overly broad patent.

Netlist borders on impossible to get hold of, but the Diablo CEO was entirely willing to have a grand old chat. Talking with him helped me understand that technical side of things a lot more, and the details around that cleared up at least some of my misunderstanding around the legal mess.

That said: there's a lot of posturing here, from both companies. From a technical standpoint, I still can't see how Netlist has much in the way of a claim, but I openly admit that the patents involved may somehow be interpreted to be more broad than my non-legal mind is capable of understanding.

The take away is that the dispute here centers around the fact that Diablo once did contract work for Netlist, and then moved on to do their own thing. Netlist feels that Diablo's "new thing" is sufficiently similar to the contract work that they once did that Diablo must clearly have used IP they own, be that inadvertently or purposefully.

Honestly, I have no idea if any of those claims will hold up, because intellectual property law isn't connected to technical realities in any way that I have yet been able to grok. But from a technical standpoint, the technologies involved are pretty far apart...with the exception of the widget that allows the CPU to address a larger address space.

Diablo claims they own the rights to it, and Netlist seems to have dropped all claims to it. So...why are they still fighting? On Netlist's side, I honestly have no idea. They will provide you canned statements about the whole thing, but not sit down and explain their reasoning. On the Diablo side, the reason is - quite clearly - pride.

The Diablo CEO is prideful. What's more, he quite clearly believes he is in the right. He will see this through because he feels strongly that Netlist is morally wrong in having wasted so much of his time and Diablo's money on this whole affair. Having talked to him, I believe that he honestly believes this.

So, I don't know about any of you, but this just keeps dragging me back to the technology side of it. The whole thing really bothers me because I just don't understand it. Is there something about my understanding of how the electrical signalling of the DRAM bus works that is inaccurate? Is my understanding of basic computer components really that flawed?

Diablo's CEO would have me believe my understanding of the gubbins of a computer is more or less correct. Netlist won't provide more than a canned explanation. For now, at least, that's the closest to "understanding" this situation as it looks like I'm going to get.

I welcome any alternative hypothesis - especially technical ones - that explain where or how Netlist has a case here. At the end of the day, all the technologies involved: LRDIMMs, NVDIMMs, Memory Channel Storage...it's all just so cool to me. The nerd in me just has to make sure he really understands how it all works.

1
2

Was ist das? Eine neue Suse Linux Enterprise? Ausgezeichnet!

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: GNU

There's your mistake: you think of systemd as just a replacement for init. It's not. It is attempting to be - piece by piece - a replacement for every single core element of the OS that isn't a kernel. Including all the fundamental userland tools (and the freaking shell) that we think of as being core to the "GNU/Linux" package.

In very much the same way that Android runs a Linux kernel but is thought of as "Android", not as "Linux", so to is systemd evolving into it's own thing. Mark my words, the GNU toolchain will be next with systemd. He's already gone after everything else, and he won't stop until he, personally, controls the whole goddamned thing.

10
2
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

The three key strains of Linux today are:

GNU/Linux

Systemd/Linux

Android/Linux

Anyone, it seems, can build a userland stack. But at the center of it all, there is still Torvalds. He's ornery. He's blunt. He's to the point. And he's usually correct.

Go ahead and try to make it Systemd/RedHatnix or whatever the hell ego-driven digital phallic madness drives the gravy train next...it won't hold a candle to the semi-benevolent dictatorship of an Angry Finn obsessed with quality control.

11
3
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

systemd/Linux? Well, that's SLES off the list. GNU/Linux or GTFO, thanks. Slackware uber alles?

6
3

Samsung turns off lights on LEDs worldwide – except in South Korea

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Bring back Tungsten filaments...

Then you buy shitty LED lamps. I live in Canada, eh? My city has had all LED lamps for a decade or more.

I guess it's just to much trouble for all y'all to invest in $5 piece of plastic to solve the problem. Can't say as I've any sympathy. If ya need to figure out how to cope with snow, maybe you could ask them as have already solved the problem.

11
0

Let's make an app that POSTS your POO to APPLE HQ

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge
Paris Hilton

Paris

0
0

Dropbox-but-with-an-actual-box firm touts new biz appliances

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Teamdrive.

0
0

Entity Framework goes 'code first' as Microsoft pulls visual design tool

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Microsoft's war on ease of use continues unabated.

1
0

Microsoft: Cloud-o-bile still only small slice of softening revenue pie

Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: How on earth can the share price continue to rise?

Microsoft has always done dividends. Though, if IBM is any indication, you can do the share buyback scheme for 15 some-odd years and see stock prices rise.

1
0
Trevor_Pott
Gold badge

Re: Building for a giant fall.

"Their traditional markets are dead or dying"

Quite the opposite. The numbers show - if anything - there is strong demand around the world for people to retain control over their own data by running their own IT. Shocking, but then, only madmen would ever have questioned "put all your data into the American cloud", eh?

3
0

Forums