Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. ×

Comment Re:FINALLY! (Score 1, Interesting) 277

Yeah, I love spending my money on inferior products that don't work as well, because brand loyalty!

It's called 'voting with your wallet.' If the company isn't getting it done with their product line, they need to know it. And there's no better message delivery than a warehouse full of stale product that nobody wants to buy. How do we know? Because of this story right here - AMD may have come up with a winner. Same or better performance at far less price. And why did they do this? Because Intel was kicking their asses up and down the block on performance, at ANY price point.

Maybe not anymore. If AMD can deliver on this announcement, they will see sales uplift. Message received.

Comment All of this has happened before... (Score 5, Insightful) 277

It seems that every time Intel gets a significant pile of laurels, they like to rest on them. Then someone comes up from behind to kick them in the ass. AMD has done it before, perhaps with this generation they can do it again.

And who wins? We all do. Last time, Intel got off their ass and created the Core-series that has expanded PC processing power to the point where upgrade cycles have gone from 3 years to 6+. Let's hope that this shot across the bow ushers in a new era of chip design that brings features we want, rather than the features that they think we want.

Comment Re: Why not land on the moon? (Score 1) 303

Apollo 8 and 10 were just Apollo 7 and 9 in lunar orbit. 7 tested the command module, not even on a full-blown Saturn V. Apollo 8 then took it to the moon, testing the service module and SBS rocket engine. 9 tested the LM in earth orbit. 10 took it into suborbital lunar flight, doing basically the whole Apollo 11 mission except the landing, flag planting, etc.

They were all test flights, and all of these guys were test pilots.

Comment Re:I got a probe for ya.... (Score 0) 507

What, you don't think it's a good use of our elected representatives time to hold highly partisan hearings on what model phone that the President tweets with?

Because I'm sure that's the only device he has with him ever, and never does he have an aide standing by that holds onto whatever phone the Government issued him.

This is the same kind of bullshit the Republicans kept trying for the last 8 years, that Democrats bemoaned. Typical partisan hacks, hacking away instead of actually doing something to make a difference. Like writing legislation to fix problems, or listening to your constituents.

Comment Re:Shade, eh? (Score 1) 126

Nope, that's not me. I have a problem wherever marketing's insatiable need for bigger numbers trumps actual engineering and common sense. Much like when Intel just kept deepening the pipeline on Pentium 4 in order to ramp clock speed, even though they were making a worse CPU due to branch prediction misses. Because Mhz sells.

Apple is making these mistakes right now, but screen resolution isn't one of them. 4K resolution makes a difference on a 27" panel and above, not so much at 15" WQXGA or on the 350+ DPI phones we already have. It's all marketing if the pixels are already small enough that you can't discern them without holding it an inch from your face. Why do they need to be smaller and more numerous, creating additional load for the hardware (read: shorter battery life, less frames per second) just to check a box on the misguided marketing requirements document?

Comment Re:Shade, eh? (Score 2) 126

If the pixels are under the DPI where your eye can even tell at a reasonable usage distance, does it matter if they are there or not?

Sounds like 3.1 million more pixels that need to be redrawn 60 times a second for not a lot more value added. Except for marketing, because they all believe that more is always better.

Comment Re:Why? (Score 1) 82

Because the telecoms are the reason all this ridiculous shit is necessary to begin with.

If the telecoms weren't the grasping motherfuckers that they are, we would already have the high speed networks we already paid for through excise taxes for the last 20 years, and Google wouldn't have to spend the resources to try to work around them.

Comment Re:first (Score 1) 382

Who's talking about little consumer generators? I'm talking about generating stations that power the grid. Even if running on petroleum, they are more efficient than any engine in any car.

Also, an electric vehicle is powered by all sources of power, not just the one that today's diesel buses are. You could burn that diesel in a generator to get more energy out of it now for pushing the bus down the road, and then in the future shut down that diesel generator in favor of solar / wind / hydro / geothermal / tidal / nuclear / whatever and keep the same bus, with the same advantages.

If there's an ROI today, there's no reason not to switch right now, because that ROI only grows into the future.

Slashdot Top Deals

Lo! Men have become the tool of their tools. -- Henry David Thoreau

Working...