the example of the pre historic "bog bodys"
thrice killed, and preserved for eternity in high tannin anoxic bogs, keeps comming to mind
almoat certainly evil doers kept as object lessons
Sibling comments have no clue what they're talking about. I actually engineer these things.
The short answer is cost and heat. What you're describing is a linear constant current driver, which are the gold standard for flicker-free operation. Drawback is a much more complex circuit and a transistor burning off a ton of waste heat.
A constant current driver requires sensing the current across the LED, which involves sensitive analog circuitry. A PWM drive requires essentially nothing more than a FET tied directly to your microcontroller.
There are switch-mode constant current drivers, best of both worlds. Essentially a buck-boost converter in current mode instead of voltage mode. These are slightly more expensive, so they don't appear in consumer lighting products.
All that aside, the reality is that if your PWM frequency is high enough, it doesn't matter. Above several KHz it's imperceptible. The reason that this still isn't done universally is that it's a third of a cent more expensive to use a controller that can switch above 1KHz. All hail the glorious race to the capitalistic bottom.
At work I just finished up a constant current driver circuit. At home I'm building a custom lighting system with bespoke driver circuits. Despite having a CC driver I can pull off the shelf, I still chose 10KHz PWM. It's easier and more efficient, and neither you or I could tell the difference in the quality of the output light.
Life lesson for you: the internal functions of every individual's mind are unique. Your n=1 perspective is in no way representative of how humans as a category experience the world.
Plenty of humans do use longhand arithmetic methods in their heads. There's an entire universe of mental arithmetic methods. I use a geometric process because my brain likes problems to fit into a spatial graph instead of an imaginary sheet of paper.
Claiming you've not examined your own mental machinery is... concerning. Introspection is an important part of human psychological development. Like any machine, you will learn to use your brain better if you take a peek under the hood.
> Claiming you've not examined your own mental machinery is... concerning
The example was carefully chosen. I can introspect how I calculate 356*532. But I can't introspect how I calculate 14+17 or 1+3. I can deliberate the question 14+17 more carefully, switching from "system 1" to "system 2" thinking (yes, I'm aware that that's a flawed theory), but that's not how I'd normally solve it. Similarly I can describe to you how I can count six eggs in a row, I can't describe to you how I count three eggs in a row. Sure, I know I'm subitizing, but that's just putting a word on "I know how many are there without conscious effort". And without conscious effort I can't introspect it. I can switch to a process I can introspect, but that's not at all the same
I bought a brand new flagship phone for $1100, couldn't jailbreak it, then the manufacturer got bored, forced an update that bricked it, then got bored and never published an update again.
Oops, try taking a second look at your own links! I said "Sideloading as a term of art originally, in practice came into usage for transferring media to devices".
Your first link actually fits the description I gave, yet you're presenting it here as if unacknowledged.
Most of the usages you link to are in the paradigm of rom flashing or physical media data transfer, and don't even have the upshot of implying that "install" means download from preferred distributor, which is critical since that's what this whole thread is about. Hilariously, even your own links contain numerous casual references to "install" to describe the ordinary act of transferring files into the phone outside of the play store. Which is devastating for your point if your point is that sideloading is supposed to be exclusive term for that action, and that "install" has a long-standing and specific usage as meaning "distributed from Play Store."
Scattershot usage from people flashing ROMs or finding workaround hacks for hardware errors don't demonstrate that that vocabulary was as widely understood in the public consciousness as a settled meaning for sideload much less that the term install exclusively refers to downloading from the Play Store. And again importantly for this thread, it actually shows an evolution of the term that predominantly was about workaround hacks and rom flashing, which has now grown to comprehensively mean any installation of an app from outside the Play Store. If anything, that's a demonstration of a neologism.
And as a kid who grew up on Windows computers in the late '90s and early 2000s, it astonishes me that I have to say this but computing existed before 2009, and gives us a history from which we can draw when figuring out the established use of terms.
And again, as I already said, this sideload/install usage is unique to Android, not observed on Windows, Linux or even Apple. Giving me a bunch of links to a form of usage that I already accounted for in my own comment, and not addressing the more important part of my comment about the prevalence of install as a distribution neutral term, disregarding the history of computing prior to Android and outside of Android is an unfortunate misunderstanding of what your links do and don't say in this context.
You're free to search XDA Forum. 2007 was the earliest mention I saw, but conversation seems to start in earnest around 2009 and never stops. Consistent hits in search from the last TWENTY YEARS.
This is not new. It may be new to you but any scary and evil connotations are your own ignorance. The term has been in common use for decades.
reply