Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 50 of 50
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by dlbrummels
    No, I didn't miss the point.



    Point one, all hard drives will crash, given a good impact on drive access/seeks etc.



    Point number two, I have repaired computers since the onset of the personal computer, when IBM was the only personal computer.



    Point three, I have seen more trashed hard drives in my life than a dealer probably has Ipods.



    AT bus, SCSI, they all the crash the same, Western Digital. Seagate, Quantum, Maxtor, etc. etc.



    Why would you argue a losing battle against all independent reviewers of the Ipod line, and an Electronics Engineer ?

    I'm enormously impressed with your credentials.

    However you're, amazingly, still missing my point entirely. Simply that the ipod mini is MORE shock resistant than the original iPod. And that many original iPod owners have been happily jogging with their iPods.

    As a former research physicist (Bell Labs) and an independent software developer who's won about 50 industry awards, I can tell you that a reviewer, is highly unlikely to be a credible source on the probability of hardware failure. Of course, after a few days of playing with his iPod, I'm sure he knows everything there is to know on the subject.


    Nor does your experience give you the slightest hint on any of the statistical probabilities. "Many drives have crashed in history" OK, therefore the probability of failure is What?

    Fact is, we both have no idea on the real failure rate. I will say that there is a year guarantee and Apple is not advising against jogging.

    What I would find persuasive is a sizable poll of iPod joggers that gives us a hint at the probabilities. Until then, I guess, its every man for himself.

    Pete

    BTW I hope you're as impressed with my credentials as I am with yours.
    Last edited by Pete_L_P; 05/28/2004 at 07:37 PM.
  2. #42  
    I spent much time a Bell Labs in Naperville, IL, during Charlie Browns time.

    But you missed my point. I didn't say the Ipod Mini wasn't more durable than the original Ipod.

    I said that it's still a hard drive, yes it is good that Apple stands behind their product. But note it will fail; at some time during an impact.

    I would not use this device for that, to costly, to valuable a commodity. Cheap disposable flash unit is best for heavy exercise.

    Sorry Judge Green killed AT&T..... But he brain killed him, or did it ?
  3. #43  
    Quote Originally Posted by dlbrummels
    Sorry Judge Green killed AT&T.....
    At the time, I thought it was the dumbest move ever. However, I now feel that the benefits have been far greater than the losses.

    Competition, has certainly help to produce an incredible amount of tech advance, and variety of service offerings.

    Pete
  4. #44  
    Quote Originally Posted by Pete_L_P
    At the time, I thought it was the dumbest move ever. However, I now feel that the benefits have been far greater than the losses.

    Competition, has certainly help to produce an incredible amount of tech advance, and variety of service offerings.

    Pete
    Pete ~ I have an itch that I can not scratch, and want your perspective.

    It's a logical question. Thought I had let go. Perhaps, you can help me.

    I imagine you must have similar feelings.

    [excuse me, while I emote . . . WTFMF]

    You and I (and most forum members) know that UNIX is the Fastest, Finest and Robust OS.

    [and you know why this is so].

    We also know that C is the most elegant code, imagine the DEC PDP 7 / 11

    We also know that PC Dos was an 8088 single user port, non-multitasking derivative of UNIX.

    We also know that NT is a highly constrained "practical extension" of UNIX.

    We also know about Tandy, Xenix, Xerox, Park, GUI and Mac's transition to UNIX.

    I guess I should throw this in, while I'm at it - DoD not Gore - Yes?

    ==> Now the Question: [Raised by your complacent conclusion]

    When we compare the fortunes of the Labs w/ Microsoft,

    do you feel that the Labs and a few individuals are

    unappreciated and uncompensated?

    And don't get me wrong,

    I like Bill, admire his ability to accomplish what IBM and the Labs could not.

    ==> Not ment to be contentious / have no interest re: arguing theses points.
  5. #45  
    Quote Originally Posted by ArcBody
    Pete ~ I have an itch that I can not scratch, and want your perspective.

    It's a logical question. Thought I had let go. Perhaps, you can help me.

    I imagine you must have similar feelings.

    [excuse me, while I emote . . . WTFMF]

    You and I (and most forum members) know that UNIX is the Fastest, Finest and Robust OS.

    [and you know why this is so].

    We also know that C is the most elegant code, imagine the DEC PDP 7 / 11

    We also know that PC Dos was an 8088 single user port, non-multitasking derivative of UNIX.

    We also know that NT is a highly constrained "practical extension" of UNIX.

    We also know about Tandy, Xenix, Xerox, Park, GUI and Mac's transition to UNIX.

    I guess I should throw this in, while I'm at it - DoD not Gore - Yes?

    ==> Now the Question: [Raised by your complacent conclusion]

    When we compare the fortunes of the Labs w/ Microsoft,

    do you feel that the Labs and a few individuals are

    unappreciated and uncompensated?

    And don't get me wrong,

    I like Bill, admire his ability to accomplish what IBM and the Labs could not.

    ==> Not ment to be contentious / have no interest re: arguing theses points.


    Carl

    Thatís a long conversation, which Iíd enjoy having, but Iíll respond briefly.

    I believe the Labs had some of the greatest talent the US has ever seen. In fact, you left out fact that the transistor itself was invented at the labs, which, as you know, is the precursor to all computing.

    The fundamental research they were doing was primarily possible due to AT&Tís monopoly status. Whatever money they put into the Labs could just be charged back to the public. So thatís a great loss (the fundamental research), probably the greatest loss of the breakup.

    As for the question of whether there are folks at the Labs who were under appreciated and under compensated. But of course. But thereís a lot to that. People didnít go to the Labs to make money. They went there, knowing that theyíd be giving that up. Basically, that there was a higher goal than money. You have to respect that, and be thankful that it exists.

    As for Gates: As I see it, his success is a function of several things, none of which are claim to being the best and most creative technologist. My view is that his greatest strength is his will to win. Heís, an incredibly fierce competitor, and winning is not enough: He must destroy the competition. Which heís done over and over again and which heís very, very good at. Heís certainly a brilliant businessman, and of course, itís helped that heís a very strong technologist.

    I had two products that competed directly with office suite products. In each case Iíd created mine before MS had a competitor. I always beat them in the reviews, but of course they eventually had to die. Fortunately, for me, I lived to tell about it. (Very nicely in fact). In the end, I agree that lifeís not fair, but Iím not complaining, and none of the people I knew at the Labs were either.

    BTW my favorite operating system of all time is not Unix. Its Dec VMS. It was created by Dave Cutler, who was given 10 Mil by Bill to go to MS and create Windows NT (which is now XP). Funny, two of my all time favorite programmers and my all time least favorite programmer (former employees of mine), also ended up at Microsoft.

    Pete
    Last edited by Pete_L_P; 05/30/2004 at 01:20 AM.
  6. #46  
    Pete ~

    Thank you for taking time to respond to my question. I do believe we are very close in our "sense" of today's amalgum of materials, die size and the practical application of same.

    As you have mentioned the transistor / I supose, in the original context of this thread I should mention 2+ decades of Holographic Data Storage technology that has not been applied, due to positive developments in bus architecture, aerial density,+ + + But I don't see us in a pissing contest. I respect your opiinion and also agree with your recounting the origin of NT.

    You have mentioned that your are retired. I am 57 and I was first trained on remote GE Mainframe systems. There were no Cathode Ray Displays, only "long-stroke" TeleType Terminals for data and equation input/output.

    Access to these early digital (and analog) computers was permitted only through DoD or National Security Clearance. Typical applications were related to structural design constants, similar to the points you have been making regarding hard drive design constants. Ability to create performance models, to determine aspects such as Stress, Strain, Yield was, at that time, a critical engineering and design tool. As you are aware, virtually all designed still undergo an array of QA/QC non-destructive and destructive testing and tials.

    "Dialog" had not yet been conceptualized, as you are aware, the fundamental database existed as part of Lockheed Missle Systems. I remember, when Dialog was created, I was assigned librarian status, as a logical method employed to ensure my awareness of all data changes and new features.

    From my perspective, if we chose to persue the specifics of history and outcome, it would be enjoyable . . . and unending. I think a sharing of views and perspectives, more than differences. A high level of objectivity must exist in each of us, by nature, training and proceedure, as a key element in our chosen careers.

    TreoCentral is well utilized by a large and growing member base. Active "foundation members" expand the value of this forum for all. In your case, you apply your training and knowledge to grow the "Treo Culture".

    I applaud you and many members, of long standing, for this comitment. It is an inspiration to those who would otherwise leave many issues unresolved.

    ~ Carl
  7. #47  
    Did I miss a turn somewhere? Weren't we talking mp3s? Not that the discussion hasn't been interesting...
  8. #48  
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Dog Doc
    Did I miss a turn somewhere? Weren't we talking mp3s? Not that the discussion hasn't been interesting...
    NJ Dog Doc ~ We're on topic - "emphasis added"

    "in the original context of this thread I should mention 2+ decades of Holographic Data Storage technology that has not been applied, due to positive developments in bus architecture, aerial density"

    ==>Thread's seminal post: [by MC Hammered]

    http://discussion.treocentral.com/sh...55&postcount=1

    "I tried out the stereo adapter . . .
    The sound quality is as good as my friends iPod!

    192k mp3 rips sounded great played with Pocket Tunes and my B&O A8 headphones . . . ."

    ==> Issues raised or provoked:
    • SD Card-based vs HDD-based
    • MTBF - Reliability and Failure Modes
    • OS issues
    • Brand Loyalty
    • Ad Hominem Attacks
    ==> Were we to discuss dogs:

    w/47 posts, you'd expect to find subset, on topic issues, ie: Ixodes dammini
    In the words of Philip E. Marlow [Michael Gambon] - "Am I right or am I right?"

    ~ Carl
    Last edited by ArcBody; 05/31/2004 at 04:56 AM.
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by NJ Dog Doc
    Did I miss a turn somewhere? Weren't we talking mp3s? Not that the discussion hasn't been interesting...
    Yes it certainly has drifted.

    Glad you've enjoyed it.

    Pete
  10. #50  
    You are so right about the quality of music from the Treo600 being headphone dependent. I use different headphones and the $149 Bose. Really Rocks! iPod beware! John
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions