JustSomeGuy1
About
- Banned
- Username
- JustSomeGuy1
- Joined
- Visits
- 60
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 1,172
- Badges
- 1
- Posts
- 330
Reactions
-
Review: Promise Pegasus R4i and J2i add massive storage to the new Mac Pro
Maybe so, but that is unambiguously wrong.melgross said:
Dell calls it a raid 10.JustSomeGuy1 said:melgross said:They make good stuff. But since I decided to put off buying a new Mac Pro until late next year, when I hope they will go to PCIe 4, I can’t consider it. So for now I bought an iMac. To get all of the stuff from my old Mac Pro, I got an OWC Thunderbay 4 32TB RAID, which I set as a 10–two raid 0s. This way I can use it when I get the Mac Pro.
it’s always hard to decide how to do this. I love internal drives, but you still have to back a raid up. With raid 5, you have a write cache. If something goes down before that cache is written, then you can lose a lot of data. So with raid five, your raid and computer need to be on a ups. Or, you can disable the write cache and accept the slower writes. Dell Business Solutions doesn’t recommend raid 5 for business data. Instead they recommend raid 10, which would use two raid 5s.No... that would be RAID 50. RAID 10 is mirrored stripes (RAID 0 to make a large volume, then mirror (RAID 1) to another RAID0). All of these have their place, along with even more complex schemes. For example, my company's larger volumes are too large for a single RAID, but they are approximately a three-way RAID 10 (there are three mirrors of each byte), just spread out over a bunch of servers (using a fancy cluster storage system called "Ceph").What do you need PCIe4 for? It's definitely better, but there's enough bw available in the nnMP for most people to do most things.I would love them to use PCIe4, but that's tantamount to switching to AMD (which I would *really* love, but sadly don't expect). IIRC, Intel has said that they will be jumping straight to PCIe5 for their Xeons, so that likely won't be until 2022. They do have blocks for PCIe4 in some of their other products, so it's not impossible that they'd change their minds, but I wouldn't bet on it.
-
Review: Promise Pegasus R4i and J2i add massive storage to the new Mac Pro
melgross said:They make good stuff. But since I decided to put off buying a new Mac Pro until late next year, when I hope they will go to PCIe 4, I can’t consider it. So for now I bought an iMac. To get all of the stuff from my old Mac Pro, I got an OWC Thunderbay 4 32TB RAID, which I set as a 10–two raid 0s. This way I can use it when I get the Mac Pro.
it’s always hard to decide how to do this. I love internal drives, but you still have to back a raid up. With raid 5, you have a write cache. If something goes down before that cache is written, then you can lose a lot of data. So with raid five, your raid and computer need to be on a ups. Or, you can disable the write cache and accept the slower writes. Dell Business Solutions doesn’t recommend raid 5 for business data. Instead they recommend raid 10, which would use two raid 5s.No... that would be RAID 50. RAID 10 is mirrored stripes (RAID 0 to make a large volume, then mirror (RAID 1) to another RAID0). All of these have their place, along with even more complex schemes. For example, my company's larger volumes are too large for a single RAID, but they are approximately a three-way RAID 10 (there are three mirrors of each byte), just spread out over a bunch of servers (using a fancy cluster storage system called "Ceph").What do you need PCIe4 for? It's definitely better, but there's enough bw available in the nnMP for most people to do most things.I would love them to use PCIe4, but that's tantamount to switching to AMD (which I would *really* love, but sadly don't expect). IIRC, Intel has said that they will be jumping straight to PCIe5 for their Xeons, so that likely won't be until 2022. They do have blocks for PCIe4 in some of their other products, so it's not impossible that they'd change their minds, but I wouldn't bet on it.
-
Apple signs EU complaint decrying FRAND patent abuse related to autonomous cars
DAalseth said:Some companies don't seem to understand what owning a FRAND patent means. If you own a FRAND patent you must license it to anyone willing to pay, and you must have essentially equal terms to all who you license too. Apple has run into this before where company X will license a patent to most companies for $Y but when Apple wants to do the same suddenly it's 2X or 5X or 10X what everyone else is paying. Sorry, but you don't get to do that. That's where the FAIR in FRAND comes from. You also don't get to charge exorbitant fees because you want to make a killing. That's where the Reasonable in FRAND comes from. These are essential patents everyone needs.All accurate enough, as far as it goes, but this article doesn't really tell us anything about the patents in question (perhaps because the complaint doesn't?).FRAND is not something that gets applied to patents automatically just because they're useful, or even foundational. FRAND is shorthand for a specific *private* agreement (not government-mediated or -imposed) between a standards body and a company (or consortium, etc.). Essentially, it is an agreement where the company makes a deal with a standards body to use "Fair, Reasonable, And Non-Discriminatory" terms in its licensing of a patent in exchange for that patent being used in a standard. See the beginning of the relevant wikipedia article for more (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reasonable_and_non-discriminatory_licensing).There is no law requiring that some patents be handled this way. Just because a patent is "essential" does NOT mean it has to be licensed under FRAND terms. And if you're lucky enough to have such a patent and not have a deal with a standards body which requires FRAND terms, you are allowed to charge out the wazoo, or only license to people you like, and nobody else has a legal leg to stand on.Monopoly/antitrust laws may or may not intersect with this issue, depending on specific circumstances. The fact that this coalition is making the argument that they do apply here suggests that the patents in question are NOT covered by any FRAND agreement, and they're looking for relief another way. So unless/until info to the contrary is provided, it seems extremely likely that FRAND is a red herring, and not relevant to this matter.
-
Study upends theory that 'night mode' UIs are good for sleep patterns
Sorry, AI, but this is really a terrible article.You conflate Night Shift with Dark Mode. They're completely separate things. And even assuming this new research is correct, Dark Mode does exactly what they say you want for better sleep: Lower the total brightness of the screen.Edit: Not that I'm advocating for Dark Mode - I don't use it, and "Godofbiscuits" above provided an extremely good link (https://tidbits.com/2019/05/31/the-dark-side-of-dark-mode/) which has a lot of good data on why it's usually a bad idea. But *if* this research is correct, it in fact says that Dark Mode will be good for your sleep, directly contradicting the first sentence in this article.
-
Apple's $5,999 modular Mac Pro now available to order
It's doesn't improve it at all. The MPX Vega II should walk all over the Radeon VII. The 5700XT is even slower.HereForTheHardware said:
You don't? I can't seem to de-select the RX 580. Plus, are their MPX form factor cards one can install in this that aren't made by Apple?Mike Wuerthele said:
You don't have to go with Apple's cards.LeBart1968 said:Bummer. I had hoped the Vega cards would be a little bit cheaper. There is really a void here. My configuration is almost $13.000. After Effects is a slouch on an iMac Pro. I really don't know what to do ... The real question is: will AE perform better on a €13.000 bomb?
You could add a PCIe card instead of MPX, but since Apple's killed Nvidia GPUs by refusing to allow them to write drivers for 10.14+ the highest-performing card you can add is a Radeon VII or a 5700XT. That saves you quite a bit of money over Apple's cards (although they force you to buy their RX 580), but doesn't improve the performance much over Apple's offerings.