Subject | Re: Adobe's Low hanging .... ? |
From | Eric Stevens |
Date | 07/16/2014 05:44 (07/16/2014 15:44) |
Message-ID | <18sbs9dj25242ko0h7lfs89mpepd0au7rs@4ax.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | nospam |
Followups | nospam (14m) > Eric Stevens PeterN (12h & 42m) |
nospamThe trouble was that it was not said to be the default case (rather than the general case) until well into the argument. Nor was the exact nature of the default defined as such until well into the argument. The problem with your failure to exactly define your terms until after the argument is underway is that you use it to duck and weave and genereally confuse the argument.
In article <teabs957pkhdcr7jpj35k7i1rgeucci0um@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens <eric.stevens@sum.co.nz>wrote:nospamEric StevensEric Stevensnospam
You really have difficulty in expressing what you mean. You previously wrote "a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data won't be lost" when you really meant a cloud outage might be annoying, but the data won't be lost as it should be stored in a copy else where.
there is no need to say that since the default is for a copy of the data in the cloud.
Then you should have said it was for the default case. Otherwise it's a generalisation which isn't always correct.
the default does not need to be spelled out. that's why it's called the default.
You have ignored my mention of phones for which the overflow is *stored* - not backed up but *stored* in the cloud. The people who do that are certain their data is secure.nospamnot only that, but one of the key advantages of the cloud multiple devices having access, so it's probably in many places. dropbox is a good example.Eric Stevens
now ask yourself how many people have only one copy of their data on a hard drive. the answer is a lot. *they* are the ones who are going to lose data.
Ditto with people and laptops and phones.
no, because a phone is often backed up to the cloud without the user needing to do much of anything.
Who said anything about their removal? You shouldn't think only in terms of software failures. I know of many cases where failure of devices such as switches, contacts, sensors, gates etc have had quite unintended consequences. I certainly would not rule out the possibility of the loss of data in the event of a failure of buttons and switches.nospamEric StevensEric Stevensnospam
Now you say smartphones are "*more* secure since there are no moving parts to fail" when you really meant smartphones are *more* secure since there are no moving parts to fail except buttons and switches which do not store data.
data storage is either on a hard drive or flash memory, not buttons and switches.
So?
it means that the device can have all buttons and switches removed and the data will be there and readable.
And another idiot couln't see the obvious.nospamwhen someone says no moving parts with regards to data storage, they mean no spinning disk.Eric Stevens
Oh, do they? Is that what you meant? Then why didn't you say so?
because it's obvious.
data is stored on a hard drive or ssd. not buttons.
only an idiot would bring up buttons, and sure enough, one did.
It's not stored by switches but it's controlled by switches. See above. --nospamonly an idiot would bring up switches. they do move but that makes no difference to the data. even if every button and switch was broken, the data is unaffected.Eric StevensEric Stevensnospam
Are you really saying that it is not possible for the failure of a button or switch to cause the loss of data? You will have to be very brave to say that: just because you don't know or can't think of an example doesn't mean it can't happen.
yes.
data is not stored in a button or switch.
Gee - that's simplistic thinking.
and correct.