mdriftmeyer

wizard69 said:

bobolicious said:

zimmie said:

tht said:

That is one strange issue. The TB3 chips in the iMac Pro aren’t full Titan Ridge chips? Bandwidth limitation?

Essentially, yes. Based on teardowns, iMac Pro units uses two JHL6540 Thunderbolt 3 controllers ("products formerly Alpine Ridge"; each handles two ports), which only support DisplayPort 1.2.

So even though the base pro tower ships with a 580X one needs an entire iMac Pro upgrade to run 6K (or better 8K) simply due to the choice of a $8.55 controller in a $5,000+ computer...?  We have a 2017 'pro' computer based on a 2010 TB standard ?    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DisplayPort#1.2

How and why does this happen...? 

You serious?   The Mac team has been poorly managed for year, little of the hardware sold as “pro” is actually pro.   Apples goals for years have been high margins at all cost no matter how badly it impacts usability.  

I know this bothers many Apple fan boys but the reality is the hardware they use in their Mac lineup is focused far more on margins than value to the customer or longevity of that hardwares. Today one needs to realize that Intel has been left behind and is no longer the first place people go looking for value or performance.  

People like to defend Apples practices and even I can understand the low end isn’t going to be state of the art.  However Apple simply markets too many machines as pro that simply aren’t pro grade at all.  

sdw2001 said:

neilm said:

sdw2001 said:

foregoneconclusion said:

Uber is full of it. Their business model was always centered around not having to follow the same laws and regulations that other companies in the same market were required to follow. Their excuse for not following them was simply "our customers use an app" and nothing else. Personally, I find it bizarre that they got away with it as long as they did.

"The same laws and regulations" means "participate in the government-controlled monopoly."   This is not about being "fit and proper."  Nor is it about safety.  It's about money.  Government sets onerous licensing requirements with huge fees.  Once they are in bed with the service providers, they, in turn, block out all competition.   The same has happened in the United States, with taxi medallions.  This is no different than the mafia controlling the trash business.  The only real difference is it's government doing the leg breaking.  

Wrong. You clearly know nothing about the taxi system in London. Look it up: there's no expensive medallion system, nor is the number of issued licenses subject to a limit. Since 1865, the principal requirement for a taxi driver in London is the Knowledge of London, a series of oral tests that generally takes close to 3 years to learn and pass.

Part of the issue here is the way auto insurance commonly works in the UK. Depending on the policy you buy, it's common for a car to be insured only for specified drivers — say you and your wife, but not your brother-in-law or some other person you might lend it to. If your wife crashes the car it's covered, but not the brother-in-law or other person. The article clearly cites this issue with Uber drivers substituting for one another and leaving passengers without valid insurance coverage in case of a crash.

I've taken many Ubers and appreciate the customer convenience their technology has brought to the market, but face it, Uber as a company are slime.

I don't claim to know the taxi system in London.  That said, I highly doubt that it's the free market subject to reasonable licensing requirements you claim.  

pulseimages said:

More like failed quality control. When Steve Jobs was running Apple their products were either better designed for easier access by the consumer or simply built better. My PowerBook G4 is still running with no issues meanwhile the 2 MacBook Pro’s that replaced it cannot touch it’s quality and have had many trips to Apple’s Repair Center. 

coolfactor said:

Quantum computing, not binary computing, is where we need to be investing more. The days of 1's and 0's are done. It's time for a whole new scale! A new approach!

jd_in_sb said:

Good luck navigating the gauntlet of processor patents