scheep
@scheep@lemmy.world
Hi, I’m sbird! I like to make all sorts of things!
- Comment on American and British English spelling and pronunciations 2 days ago:
like I spell it as “centre” and it seems perfectly fine even though phonetically it doesn’t make much sense
- Submitted 2 days ago to [deleted] | 61 comments
- Comment on What if Apple / other brands sold desktop chips? 5 days ago:
yeah. It would be interesting, but Apple obviously wouldn’t ever do that unfortunately.
- Comment on What if Apple / other brands sold desktop chips? 5 days ago:
I wonder what a motherboard designed bu Apple would look like…
also, given Apple, they would probably try to make everything proprietary (non-standard motherboard shapes, non-standard connecters, etc)
- Comment on What if Apple / other brands sold desktop chips? 5 days ago:
also, it would be really tricky to get people to buy new, probably expensive ARM motherboards (especially with Apple involved)
- Submitted 5 days ago to [deleted] | 16 comments
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 5 days ago:
But it sort of makes sense. If you use english words to name a product, it would be great for english speakers but terrible for anyone else due to translation issues and such.
I do think that they should just name their products with a sensible letters and numbers that’s easier to understand. Instead, you have a race to see who has the biggest number and the most letters :(
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
fair, using more words doesn’t really solve the issue.
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
fair point. Dell in my opinion isn’t so bad at this, especially given their extensive range of products for both consumers and businesses
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
interesting
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
Ah right that makes sense.
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
also btw, I’ve been thinking of trying to restructure and un-confuse the names of things with terrible naming schemes and pitch them to manufacturers. Is that a good idea? (maybe not the pitching to manufacturer part since they probably won’t listen)
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
exactly! Just give us numbers and words that MAKE SENSE
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
that naming scheme at least makes a bit of sense, but you’d need to KNOW the naming scheme. Most people probably aren’t well-versed at the naming schemes of every manufacturer. There are probably too many models forcing manufacturers to make alphanumeric soup names.
Why not something like the “Dell Ultrasharp 27” 1440p 2024“ (Ultrasharp doesn’t need to be repeated again as a “U”, instead of ambiguous numbers it’s more clearly defined which is screen size which is year)
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
for samsung phones, you’ve got the “A” series for cheaper models (which are A0x, A1x, A2x, etc. but why can’t it be something like Ax, Bx, Cx, etc? Otherwise people might think that an A51 might be newer than the A36, for example. Having more than 3 letters , 4 if you count the “M” series, would make things much easier. Overall though, I think Samsung’s naming schemes (for their phones) make a bit more sense than some others.
I was mostly talking about Apple and the “Pro” designation not meaning what it means. And there’s also quite a few phones with “Pro Plus” which 1. isn’t professional and 2. aren’t plus-sized models of the original “Pro”.
And yeah, I think the point you make on “obfuscation” might be correct.
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
CPUs aren’t named after serial numbers, yet they are still confusing as all heck. Laptop processors are much worse with even more letters to choose from. Motherboards are also very weird, what’s with the superfluous “0” at the end? It’s never used for anything.
Besides those however, regular things are also terribly named. Besides headphones and smartphones which I have already mentioned, there’s also shoes, cars, door locks, light bulbs, flashlights, tablets, laptops, etc. Jeez that’s a lot, and those are just the ones on the top of my head
- Comment on Why don’t brands make simpler names? 6 days ago:
What does the “H” and “U” stand for in intel processors? For Ryzen processors, why is the “7” repeated in “Ryzen 7 9700X”?
A logical person would think that 5Gbps would be USB 3.0, 10Gbps would be 3.1, 20Gbps would be 3.2, etc. But for some reason, some idiot decided it would be a good idea to have USB 3.0/3.1 Gen 1/3.2 Gen 1 as 5Gbps, USB 3.1 Gen 2/3.2 Gen 2 as 10Gbps, and appending “2x2” to the latter for 20Gbps. And USB4 is a mess, you’ve got 20Gbps (then what’s the point of 2x2) and 40Gbps (but there’s no consistent indicator whether it’s 20 or 40Gbps, not even their stupid “x.1 Gen 1” and “x.2 Gen 2” convention).
What is professional about “Pro” phones? Let’s see, usually they have an extra telephoto camera, and maybe a larger battery, but neither of those are professional features. It’s not professional anything!
Sony is weird. WH-1000XM5 is a mouthful, the “WH” stands for wireless headphones, which makes sense I guess, but why is it “1000”? I guess that goes with your other headphones, the WH-CH700N and WH-C500. But wait a minute, why is there a “CH” in front of the cheaper models? Hang on, the 500 model is a “C” instead, it’s not even consistent! Why does the 1000 end with an X, the 700 with an N (noise-cancelling? but the 1000 also has that), and the 500 with nothing. Then there’s the “M5”. It’s not a Roman numeral like their phones and cameras, and the “M” seems redundant. Also, the cheaper headphones’ newer models are 710N and 510, with no “M2” or anything like that. WHY???
And why is it that Sony’s cameras go up in number as you get more features/more expensive? You’ve got the a6000 (why the superfluous zeroes? bc it’s APS-C ig???), the a7 series, the a9 (why did you skip a8???), and then the…a1? What happened to the pattern, why are we down to 1?
Also, their “ZV” lineup is a whole nother can of worms. The ZV-1 (okay, small number for 1” sensor p&s), ZV-E10 (bigger number due to larger sensor, E bc emount, that makes sense), and then the ZV-E1. Why did it go back to 1? It has a full-frame sensor, so you’d think it would get the biggest number. But I guess it’s like a6000 vs a7, where APS-C has superfluous zeroes.
Also, the a6000 is like a6100, a6400, a6700, etc. But why is the newer ZV-E10 the “ZV-E10 II”? Why not the ZV-E11 or ZV-E20? It’s also got a lot more expensive, so giving it the ZV-E20 title aa well as leaving the ZV-E10 for purchase would make a bit more sense, but sony doesn’t do that.
Sony makes a lot more stuff with weird names (TVs, MP3 players, etc.) but I won’t get into those.
And monitors are basically (alphanumeric soup)(screen size)(alphanumeric soup), basically all monitors have terrible names. The only exception might be Apple, but their “Studio Display” is a small 27” monitor that’s IPS and 60hz, not very “studio” besides the 5K resolution and maybe colour accuracy. Then there’s the “Pro Display XDR”, which at least deserves its “Pro” branding, but the “XDR” is kinda dumb, and they haven’t updated it in like 5 years or something so why is it still sold at such a high price???
- Submitted 6 days ago to [deleted] | 39 comments
- Comment on Why don’t wireless connections (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) use anything between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz? 1 week ago:
ah that makes sense
- Comment on Why don’t wireless connections (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) use anything between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz? 1 week ago:
makes sense, using WiFi with those frequencies would make it noisy and clogged up, esp. in crowded cities
- Comment on Why don’t wireless connections (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) use anything between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz? 1 week ago:
that makes sense. regulations and such over radio waves
- Comment on Why don’t wireless connections (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) use anything between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz? 1 week ago:
shouldn’t the arrow be pointing down?
- Comment on Why don’t wireless connections (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) use anything between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz? 1 week ago:
ah that makes sense.
- Comment on Why don’t wireless connections (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) use anything between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz? 1 week ago:
Ah so the stuff in between that has things like radio stations?
- Comment on Why don’t wireless connections (WiFi, Bluetooth, etc.) use anything between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz? 1 week ago:
Is it due to cost? Does adding more frequencies increase the cost? (maybe that’s why WiFi 6E and 7 routers are so expensive)
Or is it because of compatibility? It would be more difficult to get everyone to agree on so many different wireless frequencies.
Or maybe it’s because of interference? Maybe adding things in between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz would make the network harder to read as things like 3Ghz, 4Ghz, etc. are too close to either 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz. But if that’s the case, how is 6Ghz okay?
Or maybe things in between 2.4Ghz and 5Ghz ARE being used, but for different things that would break if WiFi started to use them, and if so, what are those things?
- Submitted 1 week ago to [deleted] | 32 comments
- Comment on Why do news articles and such call the governments of countries/groups of countries after the capital? 1 week ago:
ahh that makes sense
- Comment on Why do news articles and such call the governments of countries/groups of countries after the capital? 1 week ago:
who knows
- Submitted 1 week ago to [deleted] | 17 comments
- Comment on Why is a two-party system considered democratic? 1 week ago:
maybe it’s due to the inherent human“us vs them” mentality. the “us vs them” thing really causes a lot of problems :<