swisstraeng t1_j09967i wrote
Reply to comment by Arodg25 in Japan to Manufacture 2nm Chips With a Little Help From IBM by Avieshek
Simply put: Engineers said they can't make it smaller, it didn't stop marketing people that thought it was a good idea.
It's as dumb as 2666Mhz ram, that in reality is clocked at 1333MHz, and 2666's proper unit of measurement is MT/s.
Why? Because DDRx ram stands for double data rate. Marketing wanted to use larger numbers because it sounded like it'd sell more ram.
They ended up confusing everyone. Again.
Optimistic__Elephant t1_j09rezs wrote
Also how you end up with nonsense like this.
Aetherdestroyer t1_j0axlmf wrote
What is the problem with that?
eldelshell t1_j0be2j0 wrote
Once upon a time, shaves only had one blade and then, the race to add as many blades as possible started... Is a 10 blade shave better? No, but it's all marketing (my shave has 10 blades! I'm alpha af you single blade pleb)
Demibolt t1_j0ebxcd wrote
There actually are a lot of interesting reasons for the addition of additional, smaller blades instead of just 1 larger and very sharp blade.
But despite the marketing bs, basically more blades makes it easier for someone to get a close shave while reducing the chance of irritation - while also decreasing product durability. which are all positives to them.
InternetUnexplorer t1_j0bdx4g wrote
I feel like it kind of makes sense for DDR though? Even if it's not technically correct I feel like the reasoning is pretty straightforward. I don't mind the process names either though, so maybe that's it's just because I'm used to it…
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments