Can we talk about capacitive buttons while we’re at it? Worse in every way from a usability perspective. Supposedly more reliable, yet I’ve had plenty of failures.
My damn dishwasher has capacitive buttons…a dishwasher - something you use while your hands are wet like 90% of the time. Infuriating.
You could use heat exchangers (coolant) with a thermostat. It would stay closed until the batteries reached a certain temperature then it would dissipate heat through a radiator. Just like a coolant system on an ICE car.
True. NXP chips can also be found in devices made by vendors who are too small to get a response from Qualcomm or NVidia. Unless you're moving thousands/millions of units, those big dogs won't even entertain you with a quote.
It's a discussion. If I saw someone on the street wearing these, it's not like I'd go up to them and be like "why did you waste your money on those?".
Anyway, the issue for me is that these are supposed to be audiophile/professional grade headphones - something you buy explicitly because you want the best audio quality. If you need these in the first place, then it's worth doing 20 minutes of research to see if it's the best quality for your money, or even in general.
I hate to say it, but I agree with the comments that mention these being more of a status symbol than anything. There's nothing wrong with that either, but that's the reality. I mean, they are pretty much guaranteed to perform worse than high end Sennheisers while still costing more, so what else could it be?
I find the argument of "I need professional grade headphones to do my job, but don't have the time to research the best option" just disappointing I guess.
I own AirPods Pro myself, but those are intended for a different market and are actually a decent value (compared to the Sony which has better sound quality but worse integration with Apple stuff).
Okay, I wanted to say this before but felt it was too off topic:
Never, ever, buy any Samsung appliances.
I own a few rental properties. The failure rate on any and all Samsung appliances is insane.
Their dryers are the worst. The belt tensioner is a plastic pulley with no bearing at all - it just rides on a sleeve. I've had a few of these go.
The front loader washers use some sort of zinc mounting place that reacts with the stainless steel drum and causes a failure (usually right after the warranty is up).
Just don't do it.
With companies like Samsung, quality doesn't necessarily translate across divisions. Their phones may be okay, but those aren't the same people designing the appliances.
> since DMA requires cooperation from the host CPU
Not really. I mean, yes, in the sense that the IOMMU has to be configured to allow it, but after that, it's fair game. Any PCI device can read within the inbound translation window.
I posted a similar comment and was met with a similar negative reaction - not sure why.
I think it's perfectly valid to be skeptical of the long term plans of any company.
In this case, it seems pretty obvious that they would eventually try to converge the iPad and Macbook, especially if they're running pretty much the same hardware.
I do think it would be a very long transition though.
[do not use lookup tables, they unnecessarily fill the cache...]
Good point. A major misconception that a lot of people have is that lookup tables are always faster than actually calculating a value, but cache locality is usually not given as much attention.
I saw a DJ using one of those digital encoded records a few weeks ago. Pretty cool concept, although I'm not sure what the actual difference is between that and using something like Serato which has the smaller wheels you can turn (if I remember correctly), other than being more prone to physical damage.
I guess one advantage is that it looks like they're playing the actual records. It had me fooled for a minute.
Wouldn't this be the case anyway (cache coherency overhead) even if we used types that just-so-happened to be atomic on the platform, such as "int"?
In other words, isn't this a non issue when comparing the performance of atomic types and "regular" types, as they both would require this?
Also, do the atomic types handle ordering?
I could be going crazy, but I remember seeing some of those atomic types simply being typedef'd to "int" in some OS code before.
EDIT: I was thinking of the "atomic_t, atomic_inc, atomic_set, etc..." in the Linux Kernel. It guarantees atomic behavior, but not ordering. Memory barriers are still required when using it between different threads. The C11 types appear to be different, as they accept an ordering argument in their load/store functions.
> [Using "volatile" should make stores and loads happen where they are written in the code...]
Really? I was under the impression that "volatile" basically did nothing other than prevent the compiler from optimizing out a variable that appears to not ever be written to, but is actually written to via an ISR or something.
Also, how does the compiler usually handle global variables? Since they can be modified by some code that was linked in, does it assume them to be volatile?
Of course, this issue is slightly different than the atomic-ness of certain data types. We're talking more about situations where you have a series of atomic operations which you expect to happen in the order of which they're written.
My damn dishwasher has capacitive buttons…a dishwasher - something you use while your hands are wet like 90% of the time. Infuriating.