> Headphone jacks in phones are (sadly) gone forever i'm afraid.
Maybe from Google phones, for now? Possibly on smaller phones. But Best Buy sells 7 models with 5g and a headphone jack. There's almost certainly more if you shop a retailer with more variety, using Best Buy because they have decent filtering.
I like the parametric search, but searching a US retailer helps me focus on phones that are reasonable to source and use in the US. I could manage when GSM was two bands in the US, and usually two bands overseas and if you wanted a really neat phone you hoped it was quad band or at least tri band, because the really neat phones that were dual band were dual band on EU frequencies... now GSM Arena inevitably points me at phones intended for use in Japan and usually have a pretty poor match up with bands I'm likely to use while remaining flexible for use on other carriers in case it becomes a hand me down and the recipient isn't on the same carrier as me.
My experience was kid dropped my old phone on holiday, we tried to remember why my spouse's old phone got replaced, and remembered she had a pixel 4a and the battery life had gotten really poor.
There was some news at the time that the 4a would be getting a 'battery performance update' and that it would result in some users getting a warning about their battery performing poorly and some would be eligible for $50 or a repair.
When I eventually got around to prepping the phone for the kid, lo and behold, the update was ready, I did it, and the battery was bad, and it linked me to the battery performance campaign page...
Which needed the IMEI, then said I could get $50, a $100 coupon or bring it in for repair, and there was a shop reasonably near me. I brought it in and they swapped the battery in about 2 hours with no extra drama.
I don't know why you would throw your phone out from this update... Although I wouldn't be surprised if you had already thrown it out because the battery performance was an issue before the update too.
Pixel count is objective, but never meant much. Sensor area is much more important, but doesn't make for a sexy number, and it often doesn't make it into the spec sheet.
I was going to suggest the book you mentioned, but as you mentioned it's not an description of the design process, it's a description of the system as designed.
I don't think I've seen a holistic document that tries to explain the whys of everything. You'd really need to just go through the history of changes, and look at contemporaneous mailing lists, announcements and conference presentations.
If you go back far enough, most of the algorithms are pretty basic. Lots of full array scans, which wasn't horrible because the arrays were tiny. The algorithms come from what was convenient at the time it became a bottleneck; lots of hashing, and then you increase the size of the hashtable because there's too many collisions (although sometimes that gets silly --- it doesn't make a lot of sense to hash port numbers when your hash table size is 64k, and it makes no sense to have a hash table size larger than that, because that's the size of the input space). And sooner or later you need to deal with having large numbers of cores all working on the same tables, and how that interacts with locking, NUMA, etc.
If there's some choice really puzzling you, you can probably ask on the freebsd-net mailing list, and get a reasonable answer.
I was hoping that maybe there is some book covering things like the one you described in the longest paragraph of your reply. I'm personally of opinion that such literature would benefit humanity greatly or at least that part that is doing design and programming around parts where networking meets kernels (in general, I'm also interested in non-UNIX kernels) and their internals.
Of course doing research on codebase itself is a potential way to go but I know too well from my experience years ago that it often leads to scratching your head about some parts for weeks without clear or any answer. Good literature that presents practical problems and presents different attempts on solving them has IMHO a good track record of at least decreasing amount of confusion while analyzing such systems. It also "somewhat offloads" community (developers included) from "consulting burden". As sometimes it takes even years to get answer to some technical questions.
It's always more exciting to put your important data on a drive that's been shipped in a box that's much too big for it, with much too little packing material.
For one thing, these drives aren't retail drives, and aren't covered by the retail warranty. Which is unexpected when you bought it in a retail environment. OEM drive warranty starts when originally sold, not whenever you purchased it, labeled as new.
For another, drive warranties don't cover data extraction or downtime, and while pushing the drive 4 years ahead on the bathtub curve is possibly nice for avoiding early failures, it also means you're more likely to suffer from old age failures. It might not even help that much on avoiding early failures, because shipment probably brings its own set of possible failures.
I'm only aware of one open data set of drive failures, from Backblaze, but it shows the bathtub curve pretty well, after a small number of early failures, most drive models settle down for quite some time, and then start to trend up in failures again.
I'd like my 5 years of warrantied use to be the first 5 years of the drive's lifetime. If it doesn't fail in the first couple months, there's a pretty good chance it won't fail during the warranty period, regardless of brand; even if some brands do have a meaningfully higher failure rate than others.
> Why is it always seagate when there's something wrong with HDDs?
It's either Seagate, Western Digital, or the rotating third player in the market, but there haven't really been any other options for scanadals.
I can't remember the last time the third player had a big scandal, but WD certainly goes through them from time to time. IBM DeskStar is a name that will live in infamy, but that was from before rotational drives really consolidated.
I mean, this feels more like electroshock therapy to me, but that's made a big comeback and is apparently considered relatively safe and somewhat effective.
Bloodletting has some conditions it's actually appropriate for too.
Not sure mercury poisoning is going to turn out to be safe and effective anytime soon, though.
I'm not advocating for this, but if people are going to do it with informed consent, might as well collect proper data to try to determine if it objectively works. Snake oil that works, if it actually works, is something that works.
The parkinson brain surgeries work. They have proven to have worked. They wouldn't do them if they didn't work. They work almost miraculously. The problem is that Parkinson gets worse, you can't stop it. So the surgeries will work for a specific complaint but new symptoms will eventually arise.
It doesn't solve the problem, but I thought I saw something about tournaments allowing proxies for a card that's present but in unplayable condition.
reply