Re: USB:Thunderbolt -> HHGTTG:Encyclopædia Galactica
> Never underestimate the power of being slightly cheaper
Except it's not slight. It's more like an order of magnitude.
2411 posts • joined 26 Jan 2009
> Never underestimate the power of being slightly cheaper
Except it's not slight. It's more like an order of magnitude.
> Are you sure about that?? Have you tried moving around a few hundred gigs of data over USB2 any time recently??
Yes. I do it all the time actually. Although I will be man enough to admit that I'm probably in the minority.
The thing here is that people usually aren't sitting and waiting for such a transfer to complete. This is something they will leave to finish or something that they will ingore while they are doing something else with their computer. Perhaps you have heard of this thing called MULTI-TASKING.
It's far more important that your task can finish without babysitting and not negatively impact the performance of everything else running on the machine. It's far more important that a 200G file transfer doesn't crater performance for the other apps you're using.
Mazerati speed fixations aren't really that relevant.
I don't care if it's "ugly" if it gets the job done. A pretty thing might not even be able to do the job badly.
Those geeky little details that are supposed to be obsolete now determine whether or not you can actually do something and how pleasant you will be while doing it.
500 quid on a phone? You must be insane? I've never spent nearly that much. Although I admit that all of my recent phone purchases (Apple or Android) have all been subsidized.
I would be hard pressed to spend 500 quid on a laptop.
> Sounds like Linus has pretty much lost it.
No. You just sound like an uniformed idiot. This has been his management style from the beginning. He hasn't "lost" anything. He never had it to begin with and it didn't seem to do him or his project any harm at all.
You may want to be a a whiny little b*tch but it's hard to argue with success.
Like radio before them, streaming services like Spotify and Pandora aren't there to support musicians directly. They are in the same domain of "free content" that the industry has always had since the dawn of broadcasting. The true value of any broadcast or streaming medium is the fact that it is getting you exposure.
No one will buy your stuff if they don't know about it.
People need to know about your stuff. Clear channel dominated radio is a dying dinosaur that may or may not give you any airtime. If you ever hope to sell another album again, you need an alternate promotional medium.
Musicians only harm themselves with this nonsense.
> I'm sick and tired of the all programs I have that must be updated every fscking time my Linux OS of choice gets an update.
If that's a problem then it's entirely your fault. We're talking about Ubuntu here. It doesn't get any easier than upgrading a Debian based distribution. Everything and the kitchen sink can be updated with a single command.
If you don't want new versions of your apps then why are you bothering to upgrade to begin with? It's Unix. You don't need to mess with it all the time. It's not some malware magnet that will be a menace by next week if it's not constantly patched.
Stop thinking like a Windows user.
> so why should they not move onto something that is not chained to the past?
...because something strange happened while X haters were locked in their little echo chamber.
The rest of the industry discovered the utility of some of the more "esoteric" features of X. The idea of tying things to the hardware is quite frankly a childish way of thinking that belongs back in the 80s with things like the Atari ST. Display technology tied to hardware is simply intolerably primitive.
Unix is a multi-user network operating system.
> Well, that's fine if you want to be stuck with OpenOffice, Kivio/Dia, and all the other really bad applications on the Linux platform
You're just shoveling the same old mindless Lemming FUD that people like you have been pushing since before Linux ever existed. Nothing is acceptable unless it's the herd anointed choice. It doesn't matter how good the alternatives are or what their business models are.
> This is the same strategy Oracle took, ignoring the SME and hobbyist, and focusing on the big bucks.
Are you kidding? Oracle has always been an overpriced solution for companies with money to burn.
They have never focused on the SME and they certainly have never focused on the hobbyist.
>>"...what exactly does Office 2013 offer me that LibreOffice doesn't?"
You're back to the same 80% problem. 80% of the users really don't have to care about Outlook.
It's mainly persistent FUD that keeps Microsoft products alive.
Helping to destroy this perception has been one of the nice side effect of the rise of tablets.
>> "I am going to start recommending LibreOffice "
> Good luck with that in the real world. It might suit some home users, but it is laughable inadequate in the enterprise.
I have been a successful stealth OpenOffice user in some of the largest corporations on this planet.
The necessity of any particular brand of spreadsheet or word processor has always been grossly overinflated.
> Because functionally it's far superior especially when any sort of automation or business intelligence is involved.
...which is pretty much NEVER for most people.
People have just bought into the idea that they need to use Word Perfect at home. It was a bogus idea in the 80s and it still is. Stupid Lemming fueled vendor-lock is the only real reason for this nonsense. This is true even in a business context.
Even most business users don't use the automation and BI features you're blithering about.
The only concern is "will my simple document look right".
You've moved the goalposts.
It used to be that Apple was taking over. Now it's more like "but they haven't died yet".
> Not so much in the US, but they already had big-ass back-projection CRT 60"+ sets when we brits were still squinting at 26" tubes
My first big screen TV was one of those. HDTV sets are a dramatic improvement over those beasts.
> works just fine on me iPad
Apple products are pants when it comes to what subset of the h264 standard they support. If you are interested in any other video encoding or different container formats then you might as well forget about it.
Then there's all of the other stuff from the original media besides the video.
> We've already seen things where technically the better solution
You are confusing technical superiority with personal preference.
What? Some idiot Lemming is conflating bugs with malware causing trouble in the wild. Imagine that.
The problem with fixating on Fortune 100 security requirements as they relate to Windows desktops is the fact that they relate to Windows desktops. Those are machines that are a menace on any network. This leads to a painful user experience for the megacorp employee as all of the crap that Fortune 100 companies subject a Windows box to are a cure worse than the disease.
When you see Windows app installers punching holes into the Windows firewall, you really have to wonder.
> Window 8 desktop connecting over nfs4 or smb 3.0 gives better performance than Linux in every situation.
That's funny because I can saturate GigE with Linux. It's hard to get better performance than the theoretical upper bound.
> Actually, Apple is regarded as one of the best companies for taking care of problems.
...by a captive audience perhaps.
The thing about PC users is that they can always dump their current brand for another one. There's no need to see the world through rose colored glasses because you don't have any other choice.
Problems shouldn't happen to begin with. If your Mac is languishing in the shop for two weeks then Apple has already failed you.
> I thought like that, until I noticed that the upgraded processor would need some new slot, which required a new motherboard, which often couldn't use the RAM from the old one...
Sounds like you made a poor choice to begin with. Tech moves fast but not that fast really. If you can't squeeze a few upgrades out of your hardware then you are making poor and easily avoidable choices.
Unless you paid an arm and a leg for the fastest CPU available at the time, there's probably an upgrade path for the CPU.
15 inches isn't a work screen. It's a throwback to the 80s.
It's interesting how people managed to do work for so long perfectly effectively without overpriced luxury technology being considered the bare minimum requirement.
Shortcuts or symbolic links are great. They are a dreadfully simple way of exposing multiple organizational paths to the end user. You can present the "one big pile" approach of Apple tools while at the same time keeping a sane and powerful organizational scheme. Plus they don't require a database or some special proprietary single-app-only kind of scheme.
If Win8 got rid of shortcuts then that's really retarded.
> Not only does W8 work beautiful without touch
The missus ended up with a Win8 machine. After having used it for herself she views Win8 as an intolerable drain on her productivity. That includes usability failures as well as being bloated and sucking the life out of otherwise respectable hardware.
Microsoft seems to do poorly whenever there is any sort of measurable end user resistance to a new version of WinDOS.
They have that in spades with Win8. The odd fanboy/shill doesn't change that.
Yes. Win8 is a definite negative. It also has the problem of being associated with devices where you can't install the OS of your choice. It doesn't matter if that "alternative" is Linux or Win7.
Microsoft's intentionally confusing marketing approach doesn't help.
Win8 is definitely a turnoff. It's pushing something that you are not looking for if you are buying a PC in 2013. It's bound to be another "downgrade" situation like with Vista. People will want to make sure they can put something ELSE on the hardware.
Win8 tries to flush 30 years of accumulated end user experience.
> Incorrect. An array of 6Gbps SSD drives connected to a USB 3 bus will be severely bottlenecked by the USB 3 bus.
That was not the example.
You moved the goalposts. You also did so with a setup that pretty much NO ONE here is likely to see any time soon regardless of whether or not they get to buy it with someone else's money.
> Many of us consider it worth £280 to not have these ports on the laptop.
Considering how little space they take up, this is a bit retarded really.
"Look at me! I am TRENDY! I am follwing the hip new crowd of Lemmings..."
>> A problem that doesn't exist?!?
> Clearly you've never upgraded a Mac or PC from a stock HD to an SSD. Throughput is what it is ALL about.
In both cases, your bottleneck is the storage device. The kind of cable you choose to use really doesn't alter that.
> Crashes are not uncommon with eSATA,
That's funny. I run a RAID array off of eSATA. Never had a hiccup with it.
Sounds like a sour little fanboy.
I just worked with a laptop yesterday that had an eSATA port. I was kind of surprised as it was a pretty slim laptop. If it wasn't in the MBA category it was pretty close.
> You won't find this sort of stuff on PCs much
My wife uses a USB docking station for her work laptop and has never felt deprived over it.
Thunderbolt is just for suckers that like to brag how they needlessly pay more for everything as if they really have the money to waste like that.
Soylent also came in other colors besides Green.
You know how it is with some people. They think rounded rectangles are proprietary features.
> I don't see why wiping out a native species as far as possible in order to reduce incidence of a livestock disease is considered remotely acceptable by anyone.
What? You've got nowhere over there where wild animals can roam without running into livestock?
No wonder you people think that populations should be systematically disarmed. You have no nature left.
> Bring back wolves, problem solved.
This from the same class of people that would not tolerate packs of pet dogs wandering around by themselves.
Wolves are a lot bigger and more vicious.
They're villains in fairy tales. There's a good reason they aren't lurking around cities anymore.
DVD and CD players aren't the same. They are far less bloated. They aren't weighted down with all of the nonsense that a BluRay player has to deal with.
A BluRay player is an entire patchable DRM platform. It's also a java interpreter as that crap was also added to the BluRay spec too.
Whereas a PC playing a file is going to need to deal with less bullsh*t.
Even a proper DVD player is going to involve less bullsh*t.
Plus, with an HTPC I don't have to deal with anyone's funky menus. One interface to rule them all.
The BluRay format is like a kick in the balls to consumers.
They may be opportunistic bast*rds but that's kind of what capitalism is supposed to be all about. You aren't at the mercy of just one bast*rd. You have a wide selection of them so that when one screws up you can patronize another one.
Yes corporations, knock yourself out to steak me as a customer. Bribe me away from my current brand.
> BluRay holds more data 25GB per layer rather than 15GB
> My BluRay player loads pretty fast
My latest home theatre speaker system comes with an embedded BluRay player. All it took was paying a spinny disk directly JUST ONCE to cure me of any interest in doing that again.
My HTPC doesn't just "load pretty fast". It does so instantly.
A proper OS should be able to take everything you try to throw at it and laugh at you. That's ESPECIALLY true for computer science students. People who are going to be computing professionals should not tolerate unstable crap. The Mac user had a point.
I installed Linux in college for similar reasons.
> The you'll be glad to know that CDE was open sourced a little while ago :)
The fact that CDE was closed source was one of the things that led to the creation of KDE and GNOME.
CDE only was liberated when it became painfully obvious that everyone had moved on (including the likes of Sun).
As much as I hate to admit it, Bill actually did pioneer touch screen computing.
He just put it into a format (surface) that was far too expensive to be relevant to anyone.
> Several studies, made in different ways (ie event monitoring software, returns to manufacturer, customer surveys) suggest that Apple computers are fairly reliable.
I don't need "studies". I have owned several Macs.
A little firsthand experience cured me of any clueless admiration I might have had for Apple or it's products.
It's hard to get a real evaluation of their stuff since it is expensive and vendor locked and pretty much anyone that's bothered to own their products are already drinking the kool-aid. You might as well ask a Jesuit what he thinks of the pope.
> That is fine if you have servers or extra warranties but you recon the £499 HP box from Amazon comes with a 3 year on site warranty??
I am sure that HP would be quite happy to sell you one just like Apple would.
> You have basically described a Mac Mini with external monitor.
Except perhaps for all of the other things you can get in a full tower PC.
A low profile PC can have plenty of room for expansion. You have lots of options. A PC can be as small as you want or as big as you want. Even low profile motherboards have multiple IO connectors and expansion slots.
A "Mac Mini" style enclosure is just one of the many options available.
PCs have always offered lots of options. Got my first "Mini" in 1999.
H*ell. You could cobble this sort of thing together yourself and it would not be apparent from the front.
Just get a low profile PC and use the standard ANSI mount points on any monitor. Some brands of low profile PC even include the mounting bracket.
A couple of screws and you've got your fake AIO.
> fully functional 'Mac' and the ability to upgrade the base.
Not really. The machine is simply not built to expose itself to the end user. What little you can upgrade will require more effort than a conventional PC requires. It's like trying to upgrade an Atari ST.
The Mini will quickly become a doorstop as tech passes it by or something glitches. You can't really repair it or upgrade it with high speed components. It accomodates a limited number of user serviceable components.
Plus there's the whole "lets cook the PC" approach to system design. Although you get that with any consumer Apple product.
> but the PCs are rubbish
They are not. They're the same collection of random spare parts as the Apple product.
The only real difference is the OS.
Stop swimming in the kool-aid.
Except this AIO concept isn't even like a house or a car where you outsource all of the maintenance. This is more like some car where the hood is WELDED shut.
If a device isn't maintainable by an enthusiast then it won't be maintainable by a mechanic either.
Although plugging in a new video card is not nearly the chore some would try to make it out to be.
> but without Apple levels of service etc.
You mean components that cook themselves and leaving your machine at the Apple Store for 2 weeks?
Apple can't touch the "fugly" vendors when it comes to service. It's far too much of a consumer doo-dad company. Apple doesn't really sell to people that have to worry about the cost of downtime. They are completely out of touch when it comes to "service".
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017