kelpdiver

Joined on Aug 21, 2007

Comments

Total: 112, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

EDWARD ARTISTE: Chances are the write speed is abysmal.

Companies think their customers are so stupid, and I called out WD at the last photo expo for selling 5200 speed HD's in their full size desktop chassis which most would expect to be a standard modern 7200 rpm drive. Thats one red flag.

The booth guys rationale was that it was the SAME drives being sold through all thier lines, including G Drive, with different firmware, and it was fine. Thats two red flags.

Now they have this brand new flash drives, with a read spead of up to 130mbs, and the write spead is....um...where?

While the wireless HD drive is useful no matter what speed the disc drive is, WD has fallen into the same customer-ripoff actions that happens whenever the market consolidates.

We were talking about 5400 vs 7200 rpm drives. is your pivoting back to the thumb drive a backtrack, or what? What happened to your bloviating about dumb consumers? (Maybe the fact that WD shows the information you said they were hiding is in plain sight to any literate person?)

Complaining about missing write metrics for flash drives is a legit rant. Perf for thumb drives varies radically, and unlike system drives, reads/writes are much closer to 50/50, rather than mostly read.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2018 at 19:21 UTC
In reply to:

EDWARD ARTISTE: Chances are the write speed is abysmal.

Companies think their customers are so stupid, and I called out WD at the last photo expo for selling 5200 speed HD's in their full size desktop chassis which most would expect to be a standard modern 7200 rpm drive. Thats one red flag.

The booth guys rationale was that it was the SAME drives being sold through all thier lines, including G Drive, with different firmware, and it was fine. Thats two red flags.

Now they have this brand new flash drives, with a read spead of up to 130mbs, and the write spead is....um...where?

While the wireless HD drive is useful no matter what speed the disc drive is, WD has fallen into the same customer-ripoff actions that happens whenever the market consolidates.

Are you being obtuse to make the argument, or are you really this pedantic? How could you buy anything from any storage device maker - they all have been lying for decades when they defined a megabyte as a million bytes rather than 1,048,576 bytes to boost their numbers. Under your petty logic, that should be a disqualifier.

https://www.wdc.com/products/internal-storage/wd-red.html
"RPM Class
5400"

End of nonsense.

Link | Posted on Jan 15, 2018 at 01:15 UTC
In reply to:

EDWARD ARTISTE: Chances are the write speed is abysmal.

Companies think their customers are so stupid, and I called out WD at the last photo expo for selling 5200 speed HD's in their full size desktop chassis which most would expect to be a standard modern 7200 rpm drive. Thats one red flag.

The booth guys rationale was that it was the SAME drives being sold through all thier lines, including G Drive, with different firmware, and it was fine. Thats two red flags.

Now they have this brand new flash drives, with a read spead of up to 130mbs, and the write spead is....um...where?

While the wireless HD drive is useful no matter what speed the disc drive is, WD has fallen into the same customer-ripoff actions that happens whenever the market consolidates.

It's still not that difficult to figure out which WD colors translate to 5400 or 7200 or 10k, even as their marketers shifted to "inteiiipower." It's certainly not a valid reason to trust or distrust this new product. One has nothing to do with the other.

Link | Posted on Jan 12, 2018 at 22:22 UTC
In reply to:

EDWARD ARTISTE: Chances are the write speed is abysmal.

Companies think their customers are so stupid, and I called out WD at the last photo expo for selling 5200 speed HD's in their full size desktop chassis which most would expect to be a standard modern 7200 rpm drive. Thats one red flag.

The booth guys rationale was that it was the SAME drives being sold through all thier lines, including G Drive, with different firmware, and it was fine. Thats two red flags.

Now they have this brand new flash drives, with a read spead of up to 130mbs, and the write spead is....um...where?

While the wireless HD drive is useful no matter what speed the disc drive is, WD has fallen into the same customer-ripoff actions that happens whenever the market consolidates.

5400 rpm drives have their place in 'modern' desktops. Quieter, less heat, less power. The SSD is used for speed. Any platters are used for bulk storage. Though in truth, my last 3 desktop builds have been SSD only, with bulk storage moved to a NAS.

Link | Posted on Jan 10, 2018 at 21:58 UTC

reminds me of Robin Williams as a teacher showing the quantitative method for measuring poetry.

Link | Posted on Dec 27, 2017 at 08:16 UTC as 35th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

arhmatic: Go after drones, guns are allright...
Classic!

Brab - Heller confirmed > 200 years of what the 2nd amendment meant. It's difficult to tell what you think it means, but I suspect you don't understand the term 'well regulated.'

I doubt anyone paid attention to the inclusion into the Defense bill once it got there.

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2017 at 19:44 UTC

snort - waiting for the II to be released was a 4 year tease...

Link | Posted on Dec 18, 2017 at 19:40 UTC as 86th comment
In reply to:

balios: I fail to see what DJI did wrong. If the contract that DJI offered contained an unacceptable clause(s), Mr. Finisterre has failed to divulge them. The actions of DJI, as described by Mr. Finisterre, are entirely consistent with a company concerned with protecting the private data of its workers and customers.

Mr. Finisterre says he accessed "highly sensitive user data, including: identification cards and passports, flight logs, and drivers licenses." DJI must absolutely ensure that any information is destroyed and not shared nor divulged. The $30K must therefore include some form of non-disclosure agreement.

After failing to reach such an agreement, it was also appropriate for DJI to send a legal demand that all information be destroyed. Regardless of whether an agreement is reached, Mr. Finisterre is not entitled to the "highly sensitive user data" he accessed.

probably shouldn't be storing them on internet facing servers, then.

Link | Posted on Nov 29, 2017 at 20:35 UTC
In reply to:

sh10453: Typical arrogance of a company that has become gorilla size and weight.
Personally, and as much as I can, I avoid buying anything from gorillas, such as DJI, Adobe, ..., etc.
Aside from that, DJI abides by its own country's privacy regulations, which means the Chinese government has access to everything on DJI's servers.
I'd never buy a DJI product, especially after this episode.

Given the Snowden relevations, we have no choice but to accept concerns over US data residency.

OTOH, I struggle to understand why I need to have a DC in England, France, and Germany to service customers from all 3, particularly when at least 2 of them claim to be part of the same Eurozone.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 22:59 UTC
In reply to:

balios: I fail to see what DJI did wrong. If the contract that DJI offered contained an unacceptable clause(s), Mr. Finisterre has failed to divulge them. The actions of DJI, as described by Mr. Finisterre, are entirely consistent with a company concerned with protecting the private data of its workers and customers.

Mr. Finisterre says he accessed "highly sensitive user data, including: identification cards and passports, flight logs, and drivers licenses." DJI must absolutely ensure that any information is destroyed and not shared nor divulged. The $30K must therefore include some form of non-disclosure agreement.

After failing to reach such an agreement, it was also appropriate for DJI to send a legal demand that all information be destroyed. Regardless of whether an agreement is reached, Mr. Finisterre is not entitled to the "highly sensitive user data" he accessed.

you seem more interested in semantics than anything else here, arguing the difference between a gag order or an NDA.

An NDA doesn't ensure data is destroyed. Since we're making stuff up, I'll guess that DJI wanted to ensure he didn't test their 'fixes' nor disclose to the public how negligent they have been.

Still puzzled by who would be crazy enough to give DJI pics of their passport or ID.

Link | Posted on Nov 28, 2017 at 22:57 UTC
In reply to:

thenoilif: Seeing a lot of posts knocking TIME and DPR's choice to post the article.

It may surprise some but Time is still one of the most widely published magazines in the US.
It also may surprise some that mirrorless cameras are now the most popular type of camera (outside of smartphones) when it comes to mass consumerism and at the moment it can easily be argued that the A7riii is the best mirrorless available.
So I guess it is surprising that a mass media site like DPR would link an article about the very thing they promote being highlighted in one of the biggest mass media outlets in the US.
Personally, I am surprised that so many are surprised.

'most widely published magazines' is worth how much, these days?

But our President is still obsessed with it. Last year he had fake covers of him. Today he pretended to turn them down for Man of the Year award.

Link | Posted on Nov 25, 2017 at 08:47 UTC
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Seems like price difference and camera size has vanished between formats. Now for the same money, one can get an m43, an APS or even full frame body.

Add the cost of the "pro" m43 lenses and the only thing small in this format is the sensor size.

Zebeto - you're comparing a non released lens to a manual focus one? That's more than a little cheat.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 09:39 UTC
In reply to:

ZeBebito: Seems like price difference and camera size has vanished between formats. Now for the same money, one can get an m43, an APS or even full frame body.

Add the cost of the "pro" m43 lenses and the only thing small in this format is the sensor size.

ZeBebito - would love to see the 43 lens that is much bigger and heavier than a FF lens from Canon or Nikon.

the space needed to pack up my GH4 body and multiple lenses - not remotely what is entailed with my 5D3 and company (like my sigma 50 ART).

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 01:47 UTC

A product is not unveiled when a kickstarter campaign is launched, with delivery planned for 10 months from now. That can easily be another year or never.

Link | Posted on Nov 9, 2017 at 01:40 UTC as 19th comment
In reply to:

waldoh: M.2 nvme/SSD drives for current projects.
HDDs for storage.
OneDrive/Dropbox/Carbonite for off-site backup.
CD/DVD for long term backup.

UHD sales will never match the former generations...but for those who actually care about digital bitrates, it will still have a place.

Netflix doesn't work if I'm 200 miles off shore in a boat. Or for the unfortunate people who can only get 'broadband' via satellite. Discs and players will remain available because all of this situations add up to a lot of people. I don't buy digital licenses that have a poor bitrate and only work if I can reach amazon or apple and install some awful near malware on my Windows only computers. I buy the disc, then digitize it and put it on my network to use as works best for me. I retain a lasting physical copy that cannot be taken away. And it will remain that way until there are acceptable consumer agreements for video content.

Amazon Music is a good example - with it, you can download mp3 copies for use as you see fit. They do, I believe, embed with some sort of id tag, but that's fine - I'm not distributing it to others.

Link | Posted on Oct 10, 2017 at 06:51 UTC
In reply to:

waldoh: M.2 nvme/SSD drives for current projects.
HDDs for storage.
OneDrive/Dropbox/Carbonite for off-site backup.
CD/DVD for long term backup.

Ultra HD has already proceeded Blu-ray, and guess what, it's using the same 120mm disc. This is why the 5" form will persist for many decades. Lots of people spent > $10k collecting movies. Some of us have digitized it to our filers, but this is illegal on a technical basis due to industry lobbying.

Tape does not allow random access - that's why it died out quickly. No one wanted to rewind their tapes, or manually try to find a scene or a file. Tape lasted a while longer for large scale backups, because of price and density, but dealing with robot libraries is a pain.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2017 at 19:54 UTC
In reply to:

waldoh: M.2 nvme/SSD drives for current projects.
HDDs for storage.
OneDrive/Dropbox/Carbonite for off-site backup.
CD/DVD for long term backup.

there's a pretty clear difference between tape and just about every form of storage that came afterwards. The 3.5" floppy drive is only slightly younger than VHS, and it's still readily available. But the 5" optical also dates back to the 80s and was so successful that every subsequent Successful disc format kept the same form factor, and you can buy a $25 unit that reads all of them.

Back to blu-rays for long term archives- you're confused by what long term means. For 6-12 months, you keep it on your primary filers. But by all means, keep waving your dick around. We're all impressed. Your needs are greater than waldoh's.

So how long do you retain these projects for? You glossed over that question.

Link | Posted on Oct 9, 2017 at 08:33 UTC
In reply to:

waldoh: M.2 nvme/SSD drives for current projects.
HDDs for storage.
OneDrive/Dropbox/Carbonite for off-site backup.
CD/DVD for long term backup.

Weddings are one of the larger commercial projects out there, and as you say, the finished product likely falls into the 10-20gb range. Which works just fine on a blu-ray. How long would you want to pay a cloud storage provider to retain it for you? A couple years at the most? If you're not providing the digitals to the customer, how long do you need to retain them yourself? 10 or 20 years?

laptops have dropped them to save weight, but still the norm for desktops, and cheap to add otherwise, either internally or via USB. They're not going away in our lifetime - too much established material with the cd, dvd, and blu-ray.

Link | Posted on Oct 8, 2017 at 00:19 UTC
In reply to:

silentstorm: Are these Helium drives? What recording technology is used to achieve 12TB?

I bet 10 years from now we will be starring at 20TB. WAOH-ZA!! Amazing technology progress!

We may be seeing an end to increases for the 3.5" drive. Google and the other hyperscale cloud companies are working with the industry to move to form factors that are more practical for the data center. They don't need a 3.5" size. They can adopt anything that delivers a higher density to 1000 racks.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2017 at 19:43 UTC
In reply to:

derfotograf: I really wonder about the people who claim they have 4 x 8 TB drives... what are they storing on these drives?

I am a large format photographer, working with file sizes of around 650 MB per file, but the external 3 TB drive has plenty of room for the next 3 years.

IMHO these monster drives are targeted at large companies and corporations. However, it appears to me that there are many people out there who need to brag about their (in most cases) non-existing equipment.

I miss the button 'I had one' in this article...

"I knew I wouldn't need more, because I have the films which I can re-scan any time. And for my digital images I don't panic. If disaster will struck my hardware, bad luck for me."

None of this makes any sense. Surely you have better thing to do with your time than rescan? And if it was worth your time to capture, surely it has some value? The cost of disk space, with backups, is so much cheaper than the costs around getting it.

In some aspects, it's easier for the pros. You do a shoot, and it's your job afterwards to do the post, cut it down to the deliverables, and then just archive the good stuff. If my wife and I go on a trip, we may capture 100-200gb of stills and videos, and we come back and go to our jobs. I'll spend a little time grabbing the obvious winners, but the rest will sit. I'm a few years behind now. I could throw it all away as being low value by your estimation, but why when it's less than $1000? My last trip cost us over 7.

Link | Posted on Oct 7, 2017 at 19:39 UTC
Total: 112, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »