|
A few years ago, I created a tip: Using the Article Editor (without losing your hair in handfuls)[^] and as part of it, I added a download (so I could take screenshots for the "how to add a download" section) - which I titled "Don't bother to download HelloWorld.zip" as it was just a placeholder with no real use.
And I just noticed that someone did download it ... 
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I just noticed that someone did download it ...
That someone must be curious 
|
|
|
|
|
Updated the software to iOS10.
WHERE IS MY SWIPE???
Now I have to hit the home button twice to do anything. WTF???
Why??? Give me back my swipe you barstools 
|
|
|
|
|
Come on, they only just removed the headphone connector and you want swipe back already?
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you're holding it wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
it is now a double tap on the Home button
You havent understood the product 
Press F1 for help or google it.
Greetings from Germany
|
|
|
|
|
|
So glad that you don't let the little things in life affect you so much. 
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
|
It took me a whole day to get used to the loss of swipe to unlock. I actually like it better now, it's faster when using Touch ID.
In case you REALLY can't go without...
How to Enable Slide to Unlock in iOS 10 on iPhone and iPad[^]
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
Until the damn home button starts to get a bit dodgy. Then it's a pain in the a***%#
|
|
|
|
|
Ummm... you have to press the button once to wake it up so does it really matter if you need to press it twice?
Geez! Some people would complain if you hung them with a new rope.
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
My iPad get confused as to what it should do when the button is click. Sometimes nothing, sometimes shoes all the apps running, sometimes the password lock. It ( or I) struggles to detect accurately double clicks, single click or holding down the button.
It a work device and I doubt they would replace it for me so, if I give it up I'd have to buy my own and it definitely would not be a apple.
|
|
|
|
|
RossMW wrote: definitely would not be a apple.
Because others make better buttons?
In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem. ~ Ronald Reagan
|
|
|
|
|
No, because I hate apple restrictive painful ecosystem.
|
|
|
|
|
Oh c'mon though surely it's not that bad - at least they threw iTunes in for free.
ducks and sprints for cover
|
|
|
|
|
Now wouldn't that suck. If you had to pay for something as bad iTunes.
Mind you, You have have to pay for root canals, so the precedent has been set...
|
|
|
|
|
Haha, lol. Funny you should mention dental work. I've had quite a year of it..
To be fair, I've had several root canals, part of my palate removed and more stitches in my mouth than I care to count.
I still dislike iTunes more. 
|
|
|
|
|
RossMW wrote: Until the damn home button starts to get a bit dodgy
Aha!
Now we see the real reason for the change!
Itoy sales are down, so they've added an incentive for suckers fanbois people to replace their old ones -- a working button!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Hold on, hold on...
They sued samsung because swipe to unlock was such a brilliant, superb, innovative invention, and they obviously Deserved to make billions for coming up with such a brilliant, superb, innovative invention... But now they've dumped it?
It can't have been worth anything, then.
I look forward to seeing samsung sue to adjust the penalty to match the brilliant, superb, innovative invention's true value.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
A couple of weeks ago, I decided to test if the allocation unit size (when formatting a disk) has any effect on the speed at which data is transferred to the disk. Note: This was on a conventional hard drive. I have not tested SSDs.
Without boring you with the test procedure, I found that:
1) Increasing the allocation unit size from the Windows default of 4096 bytes, to a higher value, like 16,384 bytes has very little effect when writing large numbers of smaller files. In fact the average amount of wasted space on the disk is around 8,192 bytes per file, whereas the average wasted space with an allocation unit of 4096 is only 2,048 bytes per file. However, there is less fragmentation of the disk with larger allocation units.
2) The larger allocation unit has a major effect on performance when transferring large files (several Gigabytes). With very large files, like system drive images (30 Gigabytes and more) the write speed to the disk increased between 30 and 40%
Conclusion: If you can dedicate a complete drive or partition to large files, like video or image files, it may be worthwhile to format that drive with a large allocation unit, like 8,192 or 16,384 bytes. Since the disk will not hold large numbers of files, the increase in wasted space per file is not important.
Note: Certain types of encryption will only work on disks with 4096 allocation units. I also suspect that increasing the allocation units on SSDs will have little or no effect, but I have not done tests on SSDs
For my tests I used a 4TB Western Digital disk drive in an old Vanteq Nexar enclosure, connected to the computer via USB3. It will probably not work in the newer line of Vanteq enclosures, as their transfer rate seems significantly slower than the old Nexars
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
modified 16-Sep-16 12:14pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Yep. And in the old days (pre-IDE era) when disks reported the real number of platters and heads they contained I would spend ages fiddling with the interleave to get the best setting for a particular processor / MB / HDD combination. You could double throughput by getting it right, so it was seriously worth it.
Ah, disks span slower in them days, I remember it well...
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Yep, that's true, size matters. The bigger the unit the larger amount of data that can be stored without fragmentation or risk of losing correct order. I'm kinda keen on 96 columns[^] per unit 
|
|
|
|
|
Hoi! Rip van Winkle! Wake up! It's 2016!
Get me coffee and no one gets hurt!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
