What mystery? Are you saying that Android doesn't have an easy-to-use high-level API to retrieve web pages?
I'm not sure what he's referring to there, but I suspect it's this recent article. It shows that Android does have higher limits in some browser cacheing areas.
The biggest reveal, for me, is it shows the iPad can't hold more than 26.2Kb in a cached page. WTH! This was the reason I returned my iPad. I do a lot of posting to this site and others from my iPhone, which requires me to have multiple pages going for grabbing links and researching (Exhibit A: this post). Going back to a a page I'm writing, then having it refresh losing everything was a frustrating deal breaker. For the iPad I have to assume it's a bug, but with not even a single bug fix update since April I wonder if they will simply let it ride until v4.x is ready since it is a free update for all iPad owners.
I'm not sure what he's referring to there, but I suspect it's this recent article. It shows that Android does have higher limits in some browser cacheing areas.
The biggest reveal, for me, is it shows the iPad can't hold more than 26.2Kb in a cached page. WTH! This was the reason I returned my iPad. I do a lot of posting to this site and others from my iPhone, which requires me to have multiple pages going for grabbing links and researching (Exhibit A: this post). Going back to a a page I'm writing, then having it refresh losing everything was a frustrating deal breaker. For the iPad I have to assume it's a bug, but with not even a single bug fix update since April I wonder if they will simply let it ride until v4.x is ready since it is a free update for all iPad owners.
Ahh... good info.
Ya' know there should be a system setting that allows the user to specify browser caching with reasonable defaults (so most users need not even know they exist).
Then there needs to be a caching API that allows the RAM cache to be written to SSD. The management of the SSD cache could be done in a way that the cache is distributed throughout the SSD instead of in a fixed area.
When the browser needs cache space, it can use the API to write existing browser caches to SSD.
Finally, as part of the multi-tasking implementation, when iOS purges stopped browser tasks from RAM, their cache gets written to the SSD cache area (if necessary).
Kind of a specialized PDS for browsers, implemented is SSD.
1) You linked to it in a previous post, not in the post to hin which you replied. Which is fine, if you at least mention the previous post, but a link or another hyperlink wouldn't hurt either. After all, the post of communicating is to communicate.
2) I don't think he has anything against caching.
3) Communication is useful. Some people value their time.
Nope. The data is a monthly aggregate, but the line chart used to display it implies an intra-month trend. Note the confusion this caused, which produced the entire debate. One of the first things I learned in statistics is the importance of proper data representations (assuming the intent is to accurately represent them, naturally).
This has nothing at all to do with a knowledge of math, or your implication that you are just smarter than most people. It's easy to fool virtually anyone into seeing something in a set statistics which doesn't exist. Sometimes this is done on purpose, sometimes by accident. In this case, a bar chart would have represented the data, and the trend, without any visual deception.
Sorry, you're mis-reading the chart. The chart clearly has data points - 1 per month - and the article confirms that. No one with any experience in math would understand it any differently. There is clearly nothing there which indicates intra-month trends.
The article isn't responsible for uneducated people misinterpreting the data which is clearly presented.
Sorry, you're mis-reading the chart. The chart clearly has data points - 1 per month - and the article confirms that. No one with any experience in math would understand it any differently. There is clearly nothing there which indicates intra-month trends.
The article isn't responsible for uneducated people misinterpreting the data which is clearly presented.
I'm not misreading the chart, but several other people did, which I think is understandable. In any case, charts should not be designed merely for people with backgrounds in math. They are meant to convey numerical information visually, so how they are designed matters.
Sorry, you're mis-reading the chart. The chart clearly has data points - 1 per month - and the article confirms that. No one with any experience in math would understand it any differently. There is clearly nothing there which indicates intra-month trends.
The article isn't responsible for uneducated people misinterpreting the data which is clearly presented.
He didn't misread the chart. He clearly noted what you stated about the graphbeing accurate. I misread the chart and you could have simply stated what Dr Millmoss stated but instead you got arrogant and smarmy about it.
You are correct that it's "technically accurate" but that does not make it "correct" for good communication (I think I had a similar discussion with you before where you felt communication came second to being technically accurate). A bar graph would have resolved all issues without ambiguity, which is further complicated by the article specifically referring to weeks in text even though the graph only denotes full month stats.
I really didn't want to comment, but the general lack of graph's interpretation ability by the people around here is astonishing. Go back to school, you nitwits, before commenting on any "strange" things happening in the plot.
.... and solipsism keeps at it. No, it isn't "their" inability to express in a graph, it's your graph illiteracy that is the problem here. Stop embarrassing yourself.
.... and solipsism keeps at it. No, it isn't "their" inability to express in a graph, it's your graph illiteracy that is the problem here. Stop embarrassing yourself.
I know it's crazy that I'd read, " In less than two weeks in the market, it had already tied Android and BlackBerry in Web browsing presence, but only for a few days. This week's totals show that the iPad has grown to a level where its browser was consistently larger than Android's through the month of June.", and expect the graph directly below it to be represent data points in smaller units than months. Crazy!
Ya' know there should be a system setting that allows the user to specify browser caching with reasonable defaults (so most users need not even know they exist).
Then there needs to be a caching API that allows the RAM cache to be written to SSD. The management of the SSD cache could be done in a way that the cache is distributed throughout the SSD instead of in a fixed area.
When the browser needs cache space, it can use the API to write existing browser caches to SSD.
I'm not misreading the chart, but several other people did, which I think is understandable. In any case, charts should not be designed merely for people with backgrounds in math. They are meant to convey numerical information visually, so how they are designed matters.
Ironically, the linking between plot points is an usual technique to visually help the most math incompetent people... until they start making what they believe are "tricky" questions, and derive some conspiracy out of it.
Usually, "common sense" stops people from entering a line of questioning that is out of bounds of their intellectual abilities, but not everyone.
Then why you keep at it? Had you really looked at the graph with some attention, you would have gathered that the lines between the tenth day of every month is exactly linear. Unless you believe that the data points should behave like that if there is data everyday, you would see the basicality of it all. Of course, if you do believe in that, then yes, you are f crazy.
Then why you keep at it? Had you really looked at the graph with some attention, you would have gathered that the lines between the tenth day of every month is exactly linear. Unless you believe that the data points should behave like that if there is data everyday, you would see the basicality of it all. Of course, if you do believe in that, then yes, you are f crazy.
1) You need to understand what sarcasm is.
2) You are being irrational as I've clearly pointed out the article detailed time frames less than the graph.
3) A bar graph is a better choice than a line graph.
4) Your now calling me crazy for having poorer eyesight than you. Unbelievable.
ROFLMAO. Hey. I'm not the one failing to recognize it. You are... ahahahahah... fucking hilarious.
Quote:
You are being irrational as I've clearly pointed out the article detailed time frames less than the graph.
I'm not being irrational by pointing out the stupidity. But thanks again for bringing out and outlining even more stupidity.... that particular quote was from a conclusion taken from another study altogether, which had nothing whatsoever to do with this one.... you just keep embarrassing yourself. Stop it. Really. It's too hilarious to cope.
Quote:
3) A bar graph is a better choice than a line graph.
--- grasping for excuses.... ahahaah
Quote:
4) Your now calling me crazy for having poorer eyesight than you. Unbelievable.
Jesus fucking christ. Just stop lowering the intellectual average of the thread already... you know how to do that, don't you? Oh wait...
Ironically, the linking between plot points is an usual technique to visually help the most math incompetent people... until they start making what they believe are "tricky" questions, and derive some conspiracy out of it.
Usually, "common sense" stops people from entering a line of questioning that is out of bounds of their intellectual abilities, but not everyone.
Yes, I bow to your intellectual superiority. We are mere earthlings.
Note to anyone who still cares: The concept of a "conspiracy" was introduced with the above quoted post. Nobody else made that argument.
To be perfectly honest I'm holding off on an iPad because I don't think the curreent model, as configure, can realize it's full potential. For one the current model doesn't have enough RAM.
If the device is fast enough and faster than any of the iOS devices, what difference does it make that the iPad has less than the amount of whatever that you think it should have? If it's faster than everything else, why do you require it to have a specified amount of something? Just curious.
If the device is fast enough and faster than any of the iOS devices, what difference does it make that the iPad has less than the amount of whatever that you think it should have? If it's faster than everything else, why do you require it to have a specified amount of something? Just curious.
Speed isn't the only considering when determining performance and usefulness. If having 256MB RAM is the reason nearly every Safari page has to be reloaded when you switch between pages, that is a problem. If the having 256MB RAM will affect backgrounding with iOS comes along, that is a problem. Note the iPhone 4 has 512MB RAM, less resolution and less complex apps by virtue of less screen real estate for I/O. I certainly won't be getting another iPad until it has 512MB RAM or more.
Speed isn't the only considering when determining performance and usefulness. If having 256MB RAM is the reason nearly every Safari page has to be reloaded when you switch between pages, that is a problem. If the having 256MB RAM will affect backgrounding with iOS comes along, that is a problem. Note the iPhone 4 has 512MB RAM, less resolution and less complex apps by virtue of less screen real estate for I/O. I certainly won't be getting another iPad until it has 512MB RAM or more.
iPad is faster than iPhone 4 is faster than iPhone 3GS.
If there's a problem elsewhere, then there is a problem, but let's not assume just because of the traditional willy waving aspect of a device that the iPad is lacking, okay?
Comments
What mystery? Are you saying that Android doesn't have an easy-to-use high-level API to retrieve web pages?
I'm not sure what he's referring to there, but I suspect it's this recent article. It shows that Android does have higher limits in some browser cacheing areas.The biggest reveal, for me, is it shows the iPad can't hold more than 26.2Kb in a cached page. WTH! This was the reason I returned my iPad. I do a lot of posting to this site and others from my iPhone, which requires me to have multiple pages going for grabbing links and researching (Exhibit A: this post). Going back to a a page I'm writing, then having it refresh losing everything was a frustrating deal breaker. For the iPad I have to assume it's a bug, but with not even a single bug fix update since April I wonder if they will simply let it ride until v4.x is ready since it is a free update for all iPad owners.
Don't mean to sound like a jerk...
It's a phone. That's its freakin' purpose. Btw, it's browser usage, not App usage.
Right, like you guys don't cry over Google?
I wonder why your a android developer. its just a freakin' phone.
I'm not sure what he's referring to there, but I suspect it's this recent article. It shows that Android does have higher limits in some browser cacheing areas.
The biggest reveal, for me, is it shows the iPad can't hold more than 26.2Kb in a cached page. WTH! This was the reason I returned my iPad. I do a lot of posting to this site and others from my iPhone, which requires me to have multiple pages going for grabbing links and researching (Exhibit A: this post). Going back to a a page I'm writing, then having it refresh losing everything was a frustrating deal breaker. For the iPad I have to assume it's a bug, but with not even a single bug fix update since April I wonder if they will simply let it ride until v4.x is ready since it is a free update for all iPad owners.
Ahh... good info.
Ya' know there should be a system setting that allows the user to specify browser caching with reasonable defaults (so most users need not even know they exist).
Then there needs to be a caching API that allows the RAM cache to be written to SSD. The management of the SSD cache could be done in a way that the cache is distributed throughout the SSD instead of in a fixed area.
When the browser needs cache space, it can use the API to write existing browser caches to SSD.
Finally, as part of the multi-tasking implementation, when iOS purges stopped browser tasks from RAM, their cache gets written to the SSD cache area (if necessary).
Kind of a specialized PDS for browsers, implemented is SSD.
.
What mystery? Are you saying that Android doesn't have an easy-to-use high-level API to retrieve web pages?
.
Did you read the article I linked to?
Caching is useful. Some people value their time.
Did you read the article I linked to?
Caching is useful. Some people value their time.
1) You linked to it in a previous post, not in the post to hin which you replied. Which is fine, if you at least mention the previous post, but a link or another hyperlink wouldn't hurt either. After all, the post of communicating is to communicate.
2) I don't think he has anything against caching.
3) Communication is useful. Some people value their time.
Nope. The data is a monthly aggregate, but the line chart used to display it implies an intra-month trend. Note the confusion this caused, which produced the entire debate. One of the first things I learned in statistics is the importance of proper data representations (assuming the intent is to accurately represent them, naturally).
This has nothing at all to do with a knowledge of math, or your implication that you are just smarter than most people. It's easy to fool virtually anyone into seeing something in a set statistics which doesn't exist. Sometimes this is done on purpose, sometimes by accident. In this case, a bar chart would have represented the data, and the trend, without any visual deception.
Sorry, you're mis-reading the chart. The chart clearly has data points - 1 per month - and the article confirms that. No one with any experience in math would understand it any differently. There is clearly nothing there which indicates intra-month trends.
The article isn't responsible for uneducated people misinterpreting the data which is clearly presented.
Sorry, you're mis-reading the chart. The chart clearly has data points - 1 per month - and the article confirms that. No one with any experience in math would understand it any differently. There is clearly nothing there which indicates intra-month trends.
The article isn't responsible for uneducated people misinterpreting the data which is clearly presented.
I'm not misreading the chart, but several other people did, which I think is understandable. In any case, charts should not be designed merely for people with backgrounds in math. They are meant to convey numerical information visually, so how they are designed matters.
Sorry, you're mis-reading the chart. The chart clearly has data points - 1 per month - and the article confirms that. No one with any experience in math would understand it any differently. There is clearly nothing there which indicates intra-month trends.
The article isn't responsible for uneducated people misinterpreting the data which is clearly presented.
He didn't misread the chart. He clearly noted what you stated about the graphbeing accurate. I misread the chart and you could have simply stated what Dr Millmoss stated but instead you got arrogant and smarmy about it.
You are correct that it's "technically accurate" but that does not make it "correct" for good communication (I think I had a similar discussion with you before where you felt communication came second to being technically accurate). A bar graph would have resolved all issues without ambiguity, which is further complicated by the article specifically referring to weeks in text even though the graph only denotes full month stats.
.... and solipsism keeps at it. No, it isn't "their" inability to express in a graph, it's your graph illiteracy that is the problem here. Stop embarrassing yourself.
I know it's crazy that I'd read, " In less than two weeks in the market, it had already tied Android and BlackBerry in Web browsing presence, but only for a few days. This week's totals show that the iPad has grown to a level where its browser was consistently larger than Android's through the month of June.", and expect the graph directly below it to be represent data points in smaller units than months. Crazy!
Ahh... good info.
Ya' know there should be a system setting that allows the user to specify browser caching with reasonable defaults (so most users need not even know they exist).
Then there needs to be a caching API that allows the RAM cache to be written to SSD. The management of the SSD cache could be done in a way that the cache is distributed throughout the SSD instead of in a fixed area.
When the browser needs cache space, it can use the API to write existing browser caches to SSD.
+1
Both excellent ideas.
I'm not misreading the chart, but several other people did, which I think is understandable. In any case, charts should not be designed merely for people with backgrounds in math. They are meant to convey numerical information visually, so how they are designed matters.
Ironically, the linking between plot points is an usual technique to visually help the most math incompetent people... until they start making what they believe are "tricky" questions, and derive some conspiracy out of it.
Usually, "common sense" stops people from entering a line of questioning that is out of bounds of their intellectual abilities, but not everyone.
I know it's crazy...
Then why you keep at it? Had you really looked at the graph with some attention, you would have gathered that the lines between the tenth day of every month is exactly linear. Unless you believe that the data points should behave like that if there is data everyday, you would see the basicality of it all. Of course, if you do believe in that, then yes, you are f crazy.
Then why you keep at it? Had you really looked at the graph with some attention, you would have gathered that the lines between the tenth day of every month is exactly linear. Unless you believe that the data points should behave like that if there is data everyday, you would see the basicality of it all. Of course, if you do believe in that, then yes, you are f crazy.
1) You need to understand what sarcasm is.
2) You are being irrational as I've clearly pointed out the article detailed time frames less than the graph.
3) A bar graph is a better choice than a line graph.
4) Your now calling me crazy for having poorer eyesight than you. Unbelievable.
1) You need to understand what sarcasm is.
ROFLMAO. Hey. I'm not the one failing to recognize it. You are... ahahahahah... fucking hilarious.
You are being irrational as I've clearly pointed out the article detailed time frames less than the graph.
I'm not being irrational by pointing out the stupidity. But thanks again for bringing out and outlining even more stupidity.... that particular quote was from a conclusion taken from another study altogether, which had nothing whatsoever to do with this one.... you just keep embarrassing yourself. Stop it. Really. It's too hilarious to cope.
3) A bar graph is a better choice than a line graph.
--- grasping for excuses.... ahahaah
4) Your now calling me crazy for having poorer eyesight than you. Unbelievable.
Jesus fucking christ. Just stop lowering the intellectual average of the thread already... you know how to do that, don't you? Oh wait...
Ironically, the linking between plot points is an usual technique to visually help the most math incompetent people... until they start making what they believe are "tricky" questions, and derive some conspiracy out of it.
Usually, "common sense" stops people from entering a line of questioning that is out of bounds of their intellectual abilities, but not everyone.
Yes, I bow to your intellectual superiority. We are mere earthlings.
Note to anyone who still cares: The concept of a "conspiracy" was introduced with the above quoted post. Nobody else made that argument.
To be perfectly honest I'm holding off on an iPad because I don't think the curreent model, as configure, can realize it's full potential. For one the current model doesn't have enough RAM.
If the device is fast enough and faster than any of the iOS devices, what difference does it make that the iPad has less than the amount of whatever that you think it should have? If it's faster than everything else, why do you require it to have a specified amount of something? Just curious.
If the device is fast enough and faster than any of the iOS devices, what difference does it make that the iPad has less than the amount of whatever that you think it should have? If it's faster than everything else, why do you require it to have a specified amount of something? Just curious.
Speed isn't the only considering when determining performance and usefulness. If having 256MB RAM is the reason nearly every Safari page has to be reloaded when you switch between pages, that is a problem. If the having 256MB RAM will affect backgrounding with iOS comes along, that is a problem. Note the iPhone 4 has 512MB RAM, less resolution and less complex apps by virtue of less screen real estate for I/O. I certainly won't be getting another iPad until it has 512MB RAM or more.
Speed isn't the only considering when determining performance and usefulness. If having 256MB RAM is the reason nearly every Safari page has to be reloaded when you switch between pages, that is a problem. If the having 256MB RAM will affect backgrounding with iOS comes along, that is a problem. Note the iPhone 4 has 512MB RAM, less resolution and less complex apps by virtue of less screen real estate for I/O. I certainly won't be getting another iPad until it has 512MB RAM or more.
iPad is faster than iPhone 4 is faster than iPhone 3GS.
If there's a problem elsewhere, then there is a problem, but let's not assume just because of the traditional willy waving aspect of a device that the iPad is lacking, okay?