noirdesir

Lives in Switzerland Switzerland
Works as a Engineer
Joined on Nov 4, 2006

Comments

Total: 927, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »
In reply to:

joe6pack: Besides using for backup, I can't think of a reason when someone need such big storage. It could store a lot of data, and when it failed it would take all your data, all 12TB, with it.

Assume you have three 12 TB drives, one being the primary storage and the other two being two independent backups. Then assume you have nine 4 TB drives, three of them being your primary storage, and the other two sets of three being two independent sets of backups.

Now, tell me, why would you be more likely to loose data in the first scenario over the second scenario?

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 16:24 UTC
In reply to:

runbei99: Is it true, as a Fry's supervisor told me, that it's best to buy drives no larger than 3 TB, because if the drive fails you'll need one or more equal-capacity drive to do an efficient restore?

Hope someone can clarify this, as I'll soon purchase another large backup drive.

Those large capacity HDDs are usually meant to go into some kind of RAID box for two reasons:
1) HDD read/write speeds are not going up proportionally with storage size, meaning it takes longer and longer to restore the larger the disk is. RAID systems allow you to keep working while the restore is in process thus making the restore time much less important.
2) If you have that much data to store, you are probably a professional and thus really should store your data on redundant storage and time being money, you'd want the extra speed RAID can offer.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 13:19 UTC
In reply to:

mick232: 12TB of data loss as soon as it fails.

Actually, my 20 TB HDD from 2001 is still going.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 13:08 UTC
In reply to:

Saurat: That's an awful lot of information to lose when the disc fails.

The one aspect where larger disks are worse is a longer restore time. But to compensate for this, failures are less frequent compared to having the same amount of data stored on multiple smaller drives.

If the nominal top speed of 250 MB/s were to apply (it doesn't, it only applies to the outer areas of the actual disks, the average might be only 3/4 of that and even then only for large files), it'd take over 13 h to restore from a backup. In reality, a full restore might take up to 24 h. Though, you'll likely don't fully fill such disks which means a typical restore might only take in the order of 15 hours.

The question is really whether a long restore time is bothering you. If the disk sits inside a RAID 5 or 6 box, it probably doesn't (performance will be slower during restore). And the alternative, to use, eg, twice as many 6 TB drives means you need more enclosures (or RAID enclosures with more bays). The latter, though, might enable a higher RAID version.

Link | Posted on Oct 6, 2017 at 13:03 UTC
In reply to:

0lf: So, according to exif data from DXO review, it turns out iPhone 8 do not use a larger sensor than previous iPhones : the focal length is still 3,99mm, as with iPhone 7

Techninsights report, based on X-rays, that the pixel pitch on the wide-angle camera of the iPhone 8 is the same as on the iPhone 7: 1.22 μm. Given that the resolution is the same at 12 MP, the overall sensor size should be the same as well, aka, 1/3" (or about 4.8 x 3.6 mm = 17.30 mm²). The sensor of 'tele' camera has a pixel pitch of 1.0 μm, which corresponds to the 1/3.6" sensor size (same 12 MP resolution).

They also report that the die size is also the same at: 6.29 mm x 5.21 mm (32.8 mm²). I assume this means including all the peripheral electronic components. This is also pretty much the same number as on the iPhone 7 (32.3 mm²).

They think the sensor is now produced on the TSMC 28 nm line (whereas previous iPhones would use 40 and 65 nm lines).

http://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/apple-iphone-8-teardown/

Link | Posted on Oct 2, 2017 at 12:00 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Is dxomark still "normalizing" everything to 8mp (which just happend to be be the iphone resolution when they started) so what they really mean to say is it's the best smartphone at generating 8mp stills?

Sure, but all the metrics related to resampling to 8 MP are not affected by the lens.

Link | Posted on Sep 26, 2017 at 11:25 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Is dxomark still "normalizing" everything to 8mp (which just happend to be be the iphone resolution when they started) so what they really mean to say is it's the best smartphone at generating 8mp stills?

You rate how much petrol a car consumes at fixed speed for all car models. Ditto for other things like noise levels. How fast a car can drive does enter not fuel consumption ratings.

Ditto for camera evaluations, you pick a resolution and then compare different cameras at that same resolution. What the maximal resolution of a camera is doesn't require rating by a testing body, it's written right on the tin.

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2017 at 21:13 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: Leica is a luxury brand. Meaning, it is to be bought to be showed off not to be used for its IQ.

Given his (at least) passable command of the English language, and that his name indicates Italian (possibly also Spanish or Portuguese) origin, I'd say he stayed in school some time to be able to achieve his proficiency level. (If we're trying to deduce his schooling career based on this comment alone.)

Link | Posted on Sep 24, 2017 at 21:08 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Is dxomark still "normalizing" everything to 8mp (which just happend to be be the iphone resolution when they started) so what they really mean to say is it's the best smartphone at generating 8mp stills?

4K is about 8 MP. Why would using the yardstick of how good an image looks when viewed fullscreen on a 4K monitor be meaningless? Wouldn't you decide between two cameras/phones by which produced better looking images on your screen of choice?

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 15:53 UTC
In reply to:

Michael1000: I can't stand these "mobile" tests. They are meaningless relative to a standalone camera. They might as well call them the "Powder Puff Camera Tests".

Their comparison images are useful. Just look only at the images and ignore the text.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 10:49 UTC
In reply to:

Zoom Zoom Zoom: :
ALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL the same! These small cameras on all these small phones with their small sensors and their small lenses and endless over-processing tricks, HDRs and cutesie stuff look all the same. ALL. And not to mention "DXO ratings' and the most laughably demented gimmick in the history of modern photography.

And the numerical ratings in DPreview camera reviews are a less 'laughably demented gimmick'?

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 10:46 UTC
In reply to:

keeponkeepingon: Is dxomark still "normalizing" everything to 8mp (which just happend to be be the iphone resolution when they started) so what they really mean to say is it's the best smartphone at generating 8mp stills?

No, picking any other resolution for normalisation would change the numerical results but not the relative ranking. The 24 x 36 mm sensor/film gate size has been chosen to determine equivalent focal lengths. You could choose any other sensor size (eg, APS-C) as the reference size and you would get different equivalent focal lengths but any lens that is 'longer' using the 24x36 equiv. focal length than another lens would still be longer using APS-C for the equiv. focal length.

Link | Posted on Sep 23, 2017 at 10:44 UTC
In reply to:

Mariano Pacifico: Leica is a luxury brand. Meaning, it is to be bought to be showed off not to be used for its IQ.

Leica is bit like Bang & Olufsen, producing high-end products that partly sell based on the brand name. But it's special editions straddle the line between the need of very rich people getting a kick out of having a limited-edition camera with fancy materials and design and pure collectors pieces.

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 20:08 UTC
In reply to:

blacklion: Did this Leica have any connection to Leica which makes survey tools, binoculars, optical sights?

They are completely separate companies with different owners (there could be some ownership overlap between the non-camera companies, I don't know for sure). There is some legal construct in regard to sharing the trademark (and the leica.com, leica.de domains). But that's it. The original company split into different parts, though some of those parts were other companies that Leica/Leitz had bought and combined with its own assets.

There are now even four companies: Leica Camera, Leica Microsystems, Leica Geosystems and (new) Leica Biosystems (might be a spinoff of Leica Microsystems). There is also the optical and electronics company Ernst Leitz Canada (ELCAN) which was once a subsidiary of Leica/Ernst Leitz and for a time produced a handful different Leica lenses (possibly also based an acquisition by Leica/Leitz).

Link | Posted on Sep 22, 2017 at 20:02 UTC
In reply to:

newe: I guess prices have not been totally set:

"The iPhone X will be available in 64 and 256GB versions and set you back at least $999"

So it seems that it could be a fair bit more....$1000 for Instagram and Facebook...lol

On all iPhones starting with 64 GB, the move to 256 GB adds $150.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:50 UTC
In reply to:

Biowizard: The quoted screen resolution - does it take into account the notch at the top for the face sensors, and the rounded corners? In other words, what's the actual resolution (and aspect ratio, for that matter) of largest _rectangle_ the iPhone X can display? I don't want my photos - or movies - cropped and crimped!

Brian

The listed pixel numbers are for the full rectangle (ie, ignoring rounded corners and the notch), and they really have to be because you need an image with those dimensions to full fill the screen. But the listed screen diagonal, 5.8", is the actual diagonal after subtracting the corners (the diagonal ignoring the rounded corners would be 5.95").

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:50 UTC
In reply to:

Nikonandmore: :
Sensor size is the single key most important thing for improved image quality.

To the best of my knowledge, the iPhone 7 Plus' sensor sizes are ~1/3in for the main sensor, ~1/3.6in for the telephoto lens. T I N Y dudes!!!

How can we find out the size of the new sensors on the 8? I am extremely sceptical of Apple's claim of these newer "larger" sensors that absolutely seem to have the exact same specs as the 7.

We just need an image with full EXIF data, as the latter contains the actual focal length. Combine that with the equivalent focal length and you get the sensor size.

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:44 UTC
On article iPhone X: What you need to know (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoac: I wonder what the ‘X’ signifies? Could it be eXcellent eXcel eXceed eXalt eXotic eXcite eXact eXquisite eXemplary eXpress, or perhaps eXtreme eXtortionate eXpensive eXorbitant eXcessive eXclude eXcreta eXplode eXpire eXpletive?

OS X followed Mac OS 9
Final Cut Pro X followed FCP 7
Logic Pro X followed Logic Pro 9
iPhone X follows iPhone 8

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:42 UTC
On article iPhone X: What you need to know (411 comments in total)
In reply to:

MikeFairbanks: What exactly does Apple mean by bigger sensor? What size are we dealing with now in the 6 and 7 series, and what will the 8 and 10 series be?

Does anyone have actual dimensions? Thanks

As soon as we have EXIF data (with the actual focal length) we can back-calculate the sensor size based on the published equivalent focal length (and even if we don't get the latter, we could determine it from the measurable AOV).

Link | Posted on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:39 UTC
In reply to:

newe: Very soon Apple will have $2,000 phone. And Appsheeples will go into debt to get the phone. They'll buy it because they have nothing better to do. Should be outlawed.

Take a look at this article: http://www.asymco.com/2017/07/31/how-much-will-the-new-iphone-cost/

The average selling price of an iPhone has remained remarkably level over the years. What Apple has done is adding higher price tiers on top about every three years. With the SE, they have also added a new price tier at the bottom. Initially, it was just re-adding the $400 tier, now they have gone down to $350.

Link | Posted on Sep 13, 2017 at 12:48 UTC
Total: 927, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »