The Lance J. Technoweb

 Today I read this on the Motley Fool in relation to Starlink: With Comcast offering 200 mbps for under $50 in metro locales in the U.S. you might not think [Starlink will be successful]. Why is the Motley Fool telling us this fabrication about Comcast pricing?  Motley seem to be merely repeating the words of a Comcast marketing strategy, not the pre-tax price customers actually pay.  Clearly no writer or editor for the MF is actually a Comcast ISP customer.  The sloppy editor will exclaim that the MF article is, on the surface, correct - in my "Metro Area", Comcast's claim is that they charge for 200 Mbps service at $49.99.  $49.99 is under $50.  But that number is incorrect, as Comcast fully states that the $49.99 is the price for a subset of a multi-year contract. The overall monthly cost is far, far higher. Comcast fully admits in their fine print that the fee for 200 mbps service is actually $92.95... not including other profits that show up every month as &quo

I'm a Computer guy at the end of the day.  I started writing assembler code many years ago, and so I'm always interested in what is happening in the CPU industry. This year, Apple decided to quit Intel and move to its own microprocessors, the processors it has been using for the iPhone and iPad. Many thought this was a ridiculous idea.  Losing the ability of Intel x86 virtualization and competing against the most famous microprocessor company ever seems nuts. I was wrong. Apple knocked it out of the park with their new M1 SoC.  The M1 is Apple's low-end processor, but it literally leaves Intel's high end CPUs in the dust.  And I imagine that the power and capability of Apple's desktop/workstation CPUs will be even more capable. If this is just the beginning, then we have a whole new "performance war" in the microprocessor industry.  Intel and AMD will need to amp it up, because suddenly they look far behind in performance, price, and efficiency.  The only

I run my Roomba 500 just about every day, so you can say that I'm a heavy user.  I like the Roomba series because it works well, it's reliable, and it is easily repairable if it breaks down.  My Roomba 500 has been in operation for 8+ years and is still running strong. My Early Robot Years: I have owned four Roomba vacuums over the years.  My first robot was a 2nd generation "Sage 4110" that I bought in 2007 for $160.  It was great, but I ran it hard.  One day I foolishly ran it through mud and water and it broke down. I tried to repair it, but I was an idiot and botched the repair. I'm not sure what happened to it, but I moved in 2008 and I don't have it any more. My second Roomba was a 2nd generation "Red" model, likely a 4100, that I bought around 2010 for about $100.  I ended up leaving it to my roommate when I moved to another state. Roomba 500 series Repairs and Upgrades I bought my Roomba 500 in 2012, and it has been running strong since then.