I celebrated it by buying a Galaxy S3 !

 

I celebrated your purchase by giving not one ****.

 

I think a certain somebody's beginning to feel a little sensitive about the bad press a certain company's been getting very recently.

 

Ahh but can your thumb reach all four corners of the screen

 

If it can, then he is a giant of a man and must not be messed with.
I've had the iPhone 3GS and the 4. My next phone will be something different, just because I fancy a change.
I like the features of the S3 but the size puts me off so going to look at the S3 mini or the Nokia 920.

 

Get the Nokia. Nice bit of kit.

 

That's what I'm leaning towards, the S3 I don't think will feel different enough.
I always have a tendency to pick a tech that doesn't do well though. HD-DVD anyone?

 

Not a new way but their way which seems to be well engineered


http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/artic...-drive-details

 

Hmm - can't say I agree with his conclusion that integrating it with the OS is the best way to do it.

The reason for that is if you have a large file only a part of which you only need regular, performance access to, you need to move the whole file onto the SSD. As for his comment of recovering files if one part of the 'fusion' fails, that's only even remotely possible if the data you require is on the part that remains.

It also doesn't detail how frequently data is assessed as to whether it deserves promotion to the SSD, and the comment of it caching writes is interesting; how much of the SSD layer is given over to writes, as that will impact the total amount of usable storage space? Not to mention what will happen when the cache is exceeded.

The superior method is instead to work at a block (or page) level, which is what some of the hardware solutions work to. They still have some of the above issues, but the granularity is often much finer than simply file-level.

The reality is that this isn't a particularly special or especially well engineered feature - it's simply the first time I have heard of it being included as a standard option for a consumer desktop, and the first time that many will have encountered SSD tiering at all. My main hope is that it will reinvigorate the market for tiered consumer storage, and then we will all benefit from hardware-based solutions that can offer still greater performance along with being platform agnostic.

 

Just try the bigger phone, within a very short time you will wonder why on earth you stayed with such a tiny screen. I went from the HTC Desire 3.7" to a HTC One X, basically the same size as the S3. The phone was no wider the HTC Desire HD and the bright vivid clear screen was superb. I find the larger screen much easier to work with. I have enormous hands

My next phone will be the 1080p 400ppi 5" HTC Butterfly or whatever the name becomes after the release with quad core snapdragon, 2GB of Ram

 

iPad Mini screen is rubbish

....but you'll still buy it...

 

product inferior overpriced should sell very well to the queue waiting mentally deficient

 

Just read the mac book pro is virtually impossible to repair and is not upgradeable. Also it contains Samsung memory

http://www.slashgear.com/teardown-ti...tina-25253987/

 

don't believe everything you read

 

keep up my macbook 2010 had samsung ram

 

But the irony is that despite litigation commenced
apple is and will be reliant upon Samsung even though apple tries to deny it

 

Apple are taking steps to reduce their reliance on Samsung and will be moving their supply chain of components such as memory, cpu and screens to other manufacturers. Fanboys best get those Retina equipped devices soon as they're going from iDevices, case point with the iPad Mini, inferior and lower resolution than many of its competitors with its LG supplied screens. Issues already exist for MBP with LG sourced "Retina" displays. Talk about cutting their nose off to spite their face.

 

How can Apple justify Ł269 for the mini when you can get a Kindle Fire for Ł129?

OK, the iPad Mini may be a better product technically, but more than double the price?!?!?!?

Apple have just become the new rip off merchants, I should be amazed that peope still pay for it, but I'm not

Geezer

 

Flipping heck, there is someone on here with knowledge, sense and who doesn't get swallowed up by everything Apple and its related band of disciple driven blogs/websites tell us!

 

It doesn't matter, it'll all go over the head of most Apple users. It's a halfway house solution but all that matter, it's a "FUSION DRIVE" "invented" by Apple and makes my Mac faster! "WOAH!"

 

What would you prefer, everyone goes to Currys to buy a 'not a fusion' drive and have someone fit it? How this feature can be in any way considered negative is beyond me. I suppose Time Machine integration was a bad idea too, because Windows geeks 'could' do it better??

 

What do you mean?

Ah I see what you mean!

 

Lets not ruin this thread with anothe pissing contest

 

It's so simple everyone can understand it, even you.

Apple didn't invent it Jon, but they sell a **** load of computers, the best selling computers in fact, and their buyers will benefit from it without having to understand it, that's the point isn't it, making things easier and not just on the eye.

 

It's not a pissing contest, it is just pointing out that Beef's post is the best and most sensible post on this thread not that I would expect you, as a disciple of Apple, to believe that or to be honest understand it!

 

The Toyota Corolla is the best selling car in the world and it's drivers generally don't give a shoot how it works or drives either, doesn't make it the best!

 

Don't forget Linux too.

I do think it is a positive feature - but what they need to be careful of is that buyers may well expect SSD-level performance in all situations, which will not be the case.

My preference for doing things in hardware is simply because I feel that for low-level tasks like this that's where they should be; virtualisation (a common Mac use case) started in software, but hardware support is the better and now standard way of doing it.

Introducing tiering to consumers is a good thing, and by making it a standard option there will be some who choose it simply because it's there. This will prompt other companies to do the same, but as they don't have the same control over the software-hardware relationship hardware will be the natural place for it.

What I then expect will happen is once consumers come to not just accept but expect tiering, Apple will take some of those hardware-based offerings (or develop their own) and also do it in hardware. Until they know the demand is there however it's much cheaper to rig up something software.

 

i'm quite happy with beef's post its the one that follow which make it a pissing contest

 

like these...

the thread will go the same like all the others do even a "disciple" like is getting bored of it, beefs post is logical al the others is just baiting

 

You coveniently didn't quote the nonsense posted by your fellow disciple I see! How very telling!