Sunday Shortbread

The Pick 6

  1. AppleInsider: Drop in Apple stock blamed on anticipated capital gains tax hike
  2. SuperSite for Windows – Windows 8 architecture wars: Clover Trail vs. ARM
  3. S|A: Everspin makes ST-MRAM a reality (thanks NeelyCam)
  4. iFixit’s Nexus 4 teardown
  5. Ars Technica’s Nintendo Wii U hardware review
  6. Newegg’s deals

Sunday

  1. Kitguru’s XCOM: Enemy Unknown review
  2. TweakTown reviews Enermax Hoplite ST case
  3. BCCHardware reviews Thermaltake Armor Revo Gene case
  4. NikKTech’s Nanoxia Deep Silence midi-tower case review
Comments closed
    • BIF
    • 7 years ago

    Regarding the drop in Apple Stock price:

    [quote<]The stock's fall may be attributed to a dumping of assets as investors prepare for a likely rise in capital gains and dividends taxes as part of a program to cut the U.S. deficit. [/quote<] This is pure media bull puckey. There are lots of reasons to sell a stock. But to move a stock price > 25% in this short of a time? It's not to escape taxes, I assure you. Big institutional investors are getting the hell out. Look for a reason tied to future earnings expectations. Anything else is just speculation by novices who fancy themselves experts.

    • TaBoVilla
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]SuperSite for Windows - Windows 8 architecture wars: Clover Trail vs. ARM[/quote<] Definitely waiting for second gen Surface, hopefully incorporating newer A15 ARM cores. Bit of a mistep there by Microsoft, the Tegra3 wasn't the best implementation of A9 quads, nor the best GPU from this generation.

    • dpaus
    • 7 years ago

    Developing story over at TechDirt.com that my fellow gerbils may be interested in: On Friday, a Republican study committee issued [url=http://www.mediafire.com/view/?hamegos6hnp3tmb<]a short position paper on copyright reform[/url<]. It was widely welcomed as a breath of fresh air in what is usually a one-sided diatribe from the RIAA/MPAA. Within 24 hours, the Republicans pulled it from their website - on a Saturday, no less - and announced [url=http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121117/16492521084/that-was-fast-hollywood-already-browbeat-republicans-into-retracting-report-copyright-reform.shtml#comments<]that it was all a big mistake[/url<]. Some lobby group, somewhere, has enough clout to force the Republican party to remove a 'discussion paper' document that they don't like, on a weekend, within hours of it being posted. Wonder who that could be? And why would the Republicans kow-tow to a group trying to stifle any discussion of an important issue?

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      [quote<] Wonder who that could be?[/quote<] I blame the midget Mayan/Alien hybrids that are occupying all levels of the government.

        • MadManOriginal
        • 7 years ago

        I blame the tendrilless Slans.

          • sweatshopking
          • 7 years ago

          IT WAS ME!!!!!!!

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            You monster!

      • TaBoVilla
      • 7 years ago

      outrageous, thanks for the link

      • Geistbar
      • 7 years ago

      I’d act surprised, but I’m not. I doubt we’ll see copyright reform until there’s a generation change in congress. Until we’re represented by people that grew up with the internet, we’ll keep seeing them kowtow to the old guard of copyright.

      • chuckula
      • 7 years ago

      After Romney lost everyone said that the Republicans needed to be more like Democrats. Well, the Hollywood guys who contribute huge $$$ to the Democrats would never in a million years support that paper.

      So the Republicans took the advice of everyone out there who said they should act like democrats and pulled the paper.

        • Geistbar
        • 7 years ago

        The “Hollywood guys” that donate to democrats are mostly all on the acting side, with some directors. They probably don’t care all that much if copyright is 30 years or 50 years or 70 years or … — very, very, very few of them will still be making any reasonable money off of their work that much after the fact. The Hollywood people that care about copyright length are the studio executives, the bean counters, or in more general terms, “the suits”. I doubt they have supported democrats by any significant margins.

        Beyond that, the call from republicans has been to change their party image from “old rich white men” and “big business” to a more diverse and populist take. Pulling down the paper only reinforces their old image.

          • oldog
          • 7 years ago

          Let me assure you that everyone, and I mean everyone, in “Hollywood” is an ardent supporter of the Democratic Party.

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            I guess you’ve never heard of [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clint_eastwood#Politics<]Clint Eastwood[/url<]. He's been in a lot of movies. Some rather nice ones too.

            • dpaus
            • 7 years ago

            Uhhhh….

            Sylvester Stallone?
            Bruce Willis?
            Mel Gibson?
            Chuck Norris?
            Kelsey Grammar?
            Tony Danza?
            Tom Selleck?
            Alice Cooper?
            Shannen Doherty?
            Meat Loaf?
            Jon Voight?
            Stephen Baldwin? (I’ll bet that makes for interesting Thanksgiving dinners LOL)
            Jessica Simpson?
            Fiddy Cent? (or whatever he calls himself these days)
            LL Cool J?
            Sarah Michelle Gellar?
            Todd Rundgren?
            Scott Baio?
            Robert Duvall?
            Dwight ‘The Rock’ whats-is-name?
            Gloria Estefan?
            James Earl Jones?
            Ben Stein?
            Bo Derek?
            Heather Locklear?
            Adam Sandler?

            And, as already mentioned, Clint “The Chair” Eastwood?

            Oh, yeah, that Arnie guy – wasn’t he actually a Republican governor?

            And, um, didn’t Ronald Reagan (one of Hollywood’s all-time-greatest-actors!!) actually get elected as a Republican President???

            And that’s just off the top of my head….

            Yeah,’ [i<]everyone[/i<]' in Hollywood. Assuming you're a Republican yourself, sweeping generalizations like that are a big part of why you lost the election.

            • oldog
            • 7 years ago

            Ho, ho ho. When was the last time you were at a “Hollywood” fund raiser?

            • Geistbar
            • 7 years ago

            [url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/reliable-source/post/mitt-romney-draws-hollywood-republicans-to-la-fundraiser-muses-about-airplane-windows/2012/09/24/3ceec0b8-068f-11e2-a10c-fa5a255a9258_blog.html<]Romney had a few.[/url<]

      • dpaus
      • 7 years ago

      And, a further update/commentary [url=http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20121118/23364521085/dont-let-retraction-distract-simple-fact-gop-copyright-policy-brief-was-brilliant.shtml<]has been posted at TechDirt[/url<]

      • lilbuddhaman
      • 7 years ago

      Wow, just wow.

    • iq100
    • 7 years ago

    Wow … before noon on a Sunday! I can read my favorite tech web site with my morning coffee! Keep up the good work. Remember, the early bird catches the worm, or is it the ‘fish’. lol

      • Grigory
      • 7 years ago

      Why does nobody see it from the perspective of the early worm?

        • henfactor
        • 7 years ago

        That was fantastic.

        • BIF
        • 7 years ago

        Actually, they’re late worms. The ones who get caught by the early birds are actually worms who are out past the worm-curfew.

        • willmore
        • 7 years ago

        To quote Shel Silverstein:
        “If you’re a bird, be an early bird
        and get the worm for your breakfast plate.
        So, if you’re a bird, be and early bird
        and if you’re a worm, sleep late.”

    • oldDummy
    • 7 years ago

    “Drop in Apple stock blamed on anticipated capital gains tax hike”

    Ha, seems like quite a stretch.

      • beck2448
      • 7 years ago

      Its going to get much much worse, as the imbeciles in Washington never get the concept of capital flight.

        • Grigory
        • 7 years ago

        Half of the imbeciles in Washington.

          • DeadOfKnight
          • 7 years ago

          However, you admit they’re all imbeciles.

      • Ringofett
      • 7 years ago

      Not a stretch at all, for any stock that’s had a huge run as Apple has. Sell now, pay 15%. Sell after the rapidly approaching end of the year, pay X%. Could be anything from 20 to 45% or so. Except it fell enough that I think people got scared in to selling just to preserve any gain at all.

      Go back in history, and any time tax rates are about to go up, there’s massive selling to lock in capital gains at lower rates in the year prior, this is established historical fact, and conveniently makes logical sense.

      But every stock also does have its own story. I don’t know how much lower Apple will go, its kinda cheap now on a forward PE basis, especially if you believe Apple can keep pulling rabbits out of its hat, but if the market continues to sink it can’t resist market gravity either.

      Oh, and can turn on CNBC or visit finance websites. A lot of managers and advisers recommending people do the same, refresh portfolio’s to lock in lower cap gains rates. That just makes sense for anybody, not just millionaires, unless you WANT to pay extra taxes.

        • BIF
        • 7 years ago

        It is indeed a stretch!

        The fall began in September, way BEFORE the election.

        To say that the entire fall is due to expectations of higher taxes would be like saying that big institutional investors knew two months before the election that taxes were going up.

        No way. The selling is happening because these investors are expecting that revenue and earnings have peaked and are headed lower. The reasons (no more Steve Jobs, Government, recent court decisions, Media, international business and legal climate, US unemployment, health care costs, a plateau of new product ideas, whatever) are mostly conjecture and therefore almost don’t matter.

        Finally, when everybody owns the stock, there’s only one thing to do, and it isn’t “buy”.

          • Ringofett
          • 7 years ago

          I wouldn’t say ALL the fall is due to higher taxes. If I had to guess, I’d say its a toxic mix with the fiscal cliff. Got capital gains? Need to sell. Worried about the fiscal cliff and economy in the 1st quarter? Then why buy stocks? So, motivation to lock in cap gains, little incentive to redeploy the capital. Gnarly.

          As for Apple specifically, I do think it was much more capital gains. When the Chinese middle class is snapping up iPads like they’re rice, I for one think Apple’s a huge buy right here. But if you look at its chart, a LOT of people had huge capital gains accumulated there. Only a fool would ignore the looming tax hike. Maybe even people still holding positions from sub-$100 prices. That’s huge.

          Speaking of charts, the selloff very clearly gained intensity after a certain date. If you can’t see that, I can’t help ya.

          [url<]https://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=INDEXSP:.INX[/url<] In fact, the market appeared FLAT before the election, trading in a channel, then the election, then broke out below the channel. And of course this tax outcome was uncertain. Rasmussen had the race tight until the final days. The Senate races were also considered nail-biters. It wasn't until the Democrats clearly gained seats in the Senate and retained the White House that capital gains policy became obvious. Look, there's no reason to get upset over a small market reaction to your guy winning. The market is still higher then a year ago! That's important perspective. What's also important, and telling, is that you offered no rebuttal to the (historically established and theoretically iron-clad logic) sellers, including financial advisers all over CNBC, telling people and institutions to lock in cap gains. That part just. makes. sense. The market also shivers every time Harry Reid says some nonsense like Social Security being off the table, etc. Also makes sense. They're working together, those two effects.

    • Meadows
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]S|A: Everspin makes ST-MRAM a reality (thanks NeelyCam)[/quote<] Mr Demerjian is at odds with maths. He shows a picture of an ST-MRAM module that has -- according to the same article -- 72 MiB capacity (9 chips), but subtitles it as having 64. And in a few years, when Everspin starts using more current process nodes, we may see up to 16 times the capacity! Wow, 1.12 GiB of non-volatile storage, and I only have to wait years! This is truly the future. Colour me sarcastic.

      • Arclight
      • 7 years ago

      What if they join the HMC Consotium and they stack em up?

        • Meadows
        • 7 years ago

        Doesn’t matter. Currently 256 GiB SSDs offer the best mix of price, performance, and capacity, and ST-MRAM (while impressive!) offers no metrics or any short- or medium-term outlook that validates a position on enthusiast radars. Not even in a few years.

          • OneArmedScissor
          • 7 years ago

          Tack just one chip onto a CPU and you’ll probably want to reevaluate that position.

            • NeelyCam
            • 7 years ago

            I see great potential as DRAM replacement in cell phones, tablets etc. With memory like this, standby consumes (near) zero power, and wakeup from standby is instantaneous

      • willmore
      • 7 years ago

      ECC, my friend. 64MiB of useable capacity. 72MiB of ‘raw’ capacity.

        • Meadows
        • 7 years ago

        Irrelevant. My point is that capacity was useless even for videocards, [i<]even five years ago[/i<].

          • willmore
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]Mr Demerjian is at odds with maths. He shows a picture of an ST-MRAM module that has -- according to the same article -- 72 MiB capacity (9 chips), but subtitles it as having 64.[/quote<] I addressed this and this only. I can address your other point, if you would like, but your 'color me sarcastic' comment left me thinking that you weren't being very genuine and weren't looking for a reasoned response. Since you seem to be, now, let me give you one. Take the photo in the article and look at it for a second. Where is the ST-MRAM card? Is it in the MB? No. It's in a RAID card. It's being used for *cache* for a drive array. For this application 64MiB is a perfectly useable amount of memory. Given the BW needs of these kinds of cards, there's probably two or more slots for cache, so 128MiB to 256MiB may be the total amount of system cache. That's quite reasonable. And, this is an application where non-volatile storage is *critical*. If power fails, any uncomitted writes could be lost. To combat that, you either have to have some kind of battery backup (bulky and unreliable), not actually cache any writes (slow and inefficient), or use truely non-volatile storage for the cache. This last option is the best way to go if you can manage it. With flash, it wasn't an option as you would quickly exceed the write cycle life of the memory--and the limited write speed would be a big performance bottleneck. That's what this is good for. I don't think anyone was considering putting non-volatile memory on a video card after all.

            • OneArmedScissor
            • 7 years ago

            Storage cache is also one of the first things that memristors are being used for.

            With new “drives” already being a hodgepodge of chips soldered to the motherboard and integrated into the CPU, we’re going to see some really strange hybrid storage in 2013.

            • Meadows
            • 7 years ago

            I’d like citations on how/why battery backup is “unreliable”. I’d trust it over the other methods 10 times out of 5.

            When the power goes out, the computer as a whole is bound to turn off sooner or later. In that situation, “any uncommitted writes” are the least of my worries, and a battery enables the completion of most halfway tasks that would otherwise be corrupted, enables saving all progress or logs, and generally enables either a period of continued service, or just a clean shutdown.

            I understand where you see the utility in this technology, but I’m unconvinced and I think it’s not a step forward compared to “traditional” cache tech with a battery backup.

            • curtisb
            • 7 years ago

            With this reply it’s quite evident that you aren’t familiar with enterprise-level storage. ALL enterprise-level storage uses cache between the system and the drives to increase write performance. This cache is usually in the form of a battery-backed DIMM on the controller. Because DIMMs are volatile, having those caches battery backed is VERY important in a data center environemnt as it reduces the chance of data corruption or loss in the event of a power failure to the storage subsystem. When power is restored, the data can be written from the cache out to disk.

            The batteries on these caches do fail over time, just like any other rechargeable battery. It’s one more failure point you have to keep an eye on or setup monitoring for. And if it does go bad it sometimes means an outage period to replace the battery.

            • Meadows
            • 7 years ago

            I did not realise they used caches that already have this form factor, so you learn something new every day, I guess.

      • NeelyCam
      • 7 years ago

      A blast from the past: Mr. Demerjian’s Ivy Bridge perdiction

      [url<]http://semiaccurate.com/2010/12/29/intel-puts-gpu-memory-ivy-bridge/[/url<]

        • chuckula
        • 7 years ago

        10% of the time, Charlie is right [b<]every time![/b<]

          • NeelyCam
          • 7 years ago

          And he remembers to remind you that he told you so

    • yogibbear
    • 7 years ago

    Is this the first time eight isn’t enough?

      • dpaus
      • 7 years ago

      I think this should have been called the ‘Motel 6’ Shortbread…

        • kuraegomon
        • 7 years ago

        Not on Sunday, it shouldn’t 🙂 Now we know Ronald is a (American) football guy 🙂

        • BIF
        • 7 years ago

        Oh hell, if I were Ronald, I would prepare the Saturday and Sunday shortbreads along with the Friday one. Oh and why not do Monday’s while you’re at it?

        Okay, just kidding. 🙂

        Like several others, I do prefer a morning Shortbread, but it should be noted that if we holler and scream to have the Shortbread out in the AM in the Eastern time zone, then mathematically a majority of shortbread titles will necessarily link to articles that were written “yesterday”. Or in Europe. Yesterday.

        It’s partly a math problem and partly a quantum physics problem, because he can’t (yet) link to articles that haven’t been published yet. Not without ripping a hole in space and sucking in a few shortbread readers and their huge coffee mugs!

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This