Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Aug 2009 16:07 UTC, submitted by lemur2
Linux We already discussed David Finch, Dell's senior product marketing manager for Linux clients, last week. We missed, however, some more interesting statements by Finch; Dell is looking into the ARM-based netbook smartbook market, and close to a third of all of Dell's netbooks ship with Linux.
Thread beginning with comment 379089
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: I do not really get this
by dragSidious on Mon 17th Aug 2009 21:21 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: I do not really get this"
dragSidious
Member since:
2009-04-17

The internet is there for a reason.

At work I listen to music all day long and I don't have a single song on a harddrive or removable device.

http://www.jamendo.com/
http://www.last.fm/
http://www.magnatune.com/
http://somafm.com/
http://www.shoutcast.com/

etc etc.

I also have a streaming server for my private use using Icecast2 from home.

How does your 500GB/s drive compare to the internet?! I'd have to carry around a 5-6TB/s of drive space to get the same selection that I can get from a few sites on the internet.

Reply Parent Score: 1

darknexus Member since:
2008-07-15

It's good that a small SSD works for you, I was just pointing out why it would not work for me and for quite a few others. Some of us like to have most of our data with us, so it's available even when an internet connection is not.

Reply Parent Score: 2

reflect Member since:
2007-07-10

Actually, I'm quite the proponent of lossless audio.. which makes all of your sites kind of.. well, less interesting.

I have some 2000 songs on disk (from my albums) and that amounts to 60GB (FLAC made from, unfortunately, CDs). So, for your statement of needing 5-6TB.. I don't believe you. I think you're talking about something that isn't lossless, something that saves space.

Unless my math is wrong, you'd need ~30.000 songs of lossless quality to cover just a single TB - and I don't know about most of your services there, but they're not all lossless.

====

Quantity is nice and all, but most things out there isn't interesting to any one listener. YOU are just interested in the things you like, so the majority of songs/groups are just.. well, filling. Something nice to have.

Edited 2009-08-17 22:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

dragSidious Member since:
2009-04-17

Do you use your laptop to listen to music?

and/or

Do you use earbuds or cheap (<$60) headphones to listen to music?

and/or

Do you listen to music in places with some ambient noise (like a office)?


Well if any of that is the case when you listen to music then you've effectively defeated any advantage of having lossless audio. The fidelity your able to discern is going to be rather low.

When I am at home and have my 'nice' headphones hooked up to my M-Audio Audiophile audio card is when I prefer lossless audio. I have a nice TB harddrive filled up with Flac rips of CDROMs that I purchased.

But when I am at work or out and about then I couldn't give a shit less.

Edited 2009-08-18 03:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

Tuishimi Member since:
2005-07-06

The internet is inaccessible at 30,000 feet. You can run your laptop, but no networking is allowed (at least not when I fly JetBlue).

Reply Parent Score: 2