Slashdot Mirror

I'm not a gamer but I am curious what the demand for this console is considering the next generation system has been available for several years?

Demand is huge for anyone without an always-on Internet connection.

In an interview with GameTrailer, Don Mattrick, President of Microsoft's Interactive Entertainment division, said: "Fortunately we have a product for people who aren't able to get some form of connectivity, it's called Xbox 360. If you have zero access to internet, that is an offline device." He then independently raised the issue of whether or not Microsoft would support soldiers on deployment with the Xbox One - and stated that they wouldn't. "I've got to imagine that it's not easy to get an internet connection. Hey, I can empathize. If I was on a sub, I'd be disappointed."

http://www.extremetech.com/gam...

When Microsoft announced the xbox one requires an always-on Internet connection for regular phone-home checks even to play single player games, there was a pretty huge backlash.

Microsofts official response was that if you live in the sticks on dialup or are in the navy on a boat, the xbox one is not for you and you should instead buy an xbox 360.

Even Sony got a huge market boost because of this by listing as bullet point features of the PS4 that a) you can play all but online multiplayer games without an always-on Internet connection, and b) you are allowed to sell/trade/keep/destroy the games you have purchased.
(Microsoft was also intending to lock a game to the xbox one so the disc could never be used on another xbox one. No selling or trading or loaning of games, and no more used game market)

Now all of the people who care about such things have no Microsoft offerings in the game console world at all.

Why is this such a breakthrough? Google self driving cars have been using LIDAR for years: http://www.extremetech.com/ext...

I will remain forever wedded to Firefox, and if it goes away, then Chrome.

Firefox is just about to get the boot from my machines. I have membership (that I can't get out of) in some Yahoo groups. Due to a mail issue, I had to go to their web mail reader for a few days. Up past my NoScript and ad-blockers and all the other digi-condoms I have on my computers, the screen goes dark, and up pops a window trying to get me to integrate my Yahoo experience into my Firefox, then the screen scrolls down so I cannot simply hit the close button.

Sorry, Yahoo, sorry Firefox. Your Faustian deals don't win you anything but enmity. I don't want to see what some housewife in Pennsylvania found that is driving insurance companies crazy, nor do I want to make a NCAA basketball tourney bracket. I don't want I wanna read my mail. Right behind that roadblock you put up. So it's going to be something else very soon.

Fortunately I can get the group mailings in the sane mail reader I use once again.

Some interesting info on what these assholes are demanding that we accept:

http://www.extremetech.com/int... I wonder how this treating the user as the enemy is going to work out?

I don't really see a reason why a thumb-width cable full of twisted pairs of copper can't be brought to the unit or even to the end-point.

Like them?

http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

It's more resilient than fiber is, in the physical sense.

It's much, much, much, much more expensive. As for resilliance, it depends what you mean. On long links, the crosstalk, resistance and capacitance will kill the datarate of the copper so much, that you could replace that with a small fiber bundle and make most of the rest of the size steel armour sheathing. IOW, for a given bandwidth and cable diameter, you can make a fiber based cable much tougher.

What am I missing? Why is this not done? Why is there no CAT-55, CAT-60,

Twisted pairs are not that great over long haul. Controlling the impedence is hard so you get signal scattering whenever it changes. Also, see crosstalk to other twisted pairs. Coax works much better for long hauls, but it's much more expensive to produce. It also doesn't have the same run length as fiber but it beats twisted pair. For example, 12G (and soon 24G) SDI pushes digital video over a single coax at a rate of 12 (or 24Gbit/s) for about 100m. For those prefering run length over raw speed DOCSIS (cable TV/modem) specifies a rather robust 10GBit/s over copper for residential length scales (i.e. hundreds of meters) and there are people who make base-T ethernet to coax bridges which can push at least gigabit ethernet over miles.

http://www.extremetech.com/ext... 13.8 billion year archive media with ultra-high densities.

Even so, it's a pretty entertaining story. For compensation, here's another entertaining story about a death-ray solar power plant.

Er... you are aware that Air Force One has phones on it right?

http://www.extremetech.com/ext...

(And even before the upgrade it had phones. )

Forbes has chosen to speed their journey into irrelevance with their policies. Don't force Slashdot to follow them down that hole by becoming dependent upon their content.

I would make a sincere request that the editors stop accepting any articles from Forbes, period.

https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

http://www.extremetech.com/int...

http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

http://www.networkworld.com/ar...

One of these sweet bits of kit was the angler exploit kit.

http://researchcenter.paloalto...

Just imagine, 90,000 plus websites out there, just waiting for me to disable my adblocker in order to get some of their yummy ransomware.

Anyhow, take this in the spirit it's given, in case the editors didn't know what Forbes stands for these days. Forced malware.

Nor the destructive power...

This has always been AMD's angle in the business. Well, sorta. Fifteen years ago or about, their angle was to be as good for cheaper in the middle range of CPUs. Intel still had the upper hand for top chips.

Were you living in a cave between 2000 and 2006? AMD was generally preferred by enthusiasts and gamers during Intel's infamous Pentium4/Itanium/Netburst/Rambus period for at least the first few years of the new millenium. It wasn't really until 2006 with Core (Conroe) replacing Pentium that Intel finally took back the lead they had in the 90s. They released the excellent Pentium M CPU in 2003 but that was a mobile chip. Only one or two highly specialized and expensive motherboards supported it. Intel finally realized that the whole Pentium 4 development branch was itself an inefficient long pipeline cache miss, but by the time they did AMD was already the market leader in the enthusiast bleeding edge market segment.

At best Intel could have claimed to be tied with AMD in certain benchmarks, but most gamers and enthusiasts were going for AMD CPUs. During this period AMD CPUs often sold for equal or higher prices as well. Although Rambus RDRAM was ridiculously expensive and raised the cost of the Intel platform a great deal.

Take a look at this Extremetech article . Maybe that will jog your memory a bit.

Also note Intel's naive optimism with respect to Moore's Law:

Justin Rattner, Intel Fellow and director of Microprocessor Research at Intel Labs, predicts 10GHz by middle of the decade (which I read as end of 2005 to early 2006)

And also, I noticed that TrendMicro is a sponsor... is that their method of making sure that their product is never a focus of the hacker attention?

Except for the fact that last year it was the most insecure! http://www.extremetech.com/com... So, least secure last year, plus the statement "We wanted to focus on the browsers that have made serious security improvements in the last year" clearly indicates they think it is not worth the effort due to the insecure nature of the browser.

Ah, I was looking for something like this when writing my comment. It's rather hard to find an up-to-date review of web browser vulnerabilities, which is curiously strange. Even so though, these results are from beginning of 2014, which was almost two years ago. I'll grant you Firefox doesn't have the same track record, but my point still stands: I think they're mainly doing it because they don't have infinite money and the same web browser again isn't very sexy.

However, if I may bring up a point here: Firefox isn't super outstanding secure out of the box, but it has great support for extensions, and a few of the right ones can vastly improve its security. I don't know if Chrome can do the same (genuinely not sure, the last time I used it at all was ~2012). Also, because these all seem to depend on certain platforms, I wonder if/how many of these browser insecurities target the underlying OS as opposed to the browser itself?

Except for the fact that last year it was the most insecure! http://www.extremetech.com/com... So, least secure last year, plus the statement "We wanted to focus on the browsers that have made serious security improvements in the last year" clearly indicates they think it is not worth the effort due to the insecure nature of the browser.

Solar PV has essentially zero maintenance cost once installed.

"Essentially zero" turns out to be non-zero, and the lag and lead costs of each maintenance event are multiplied by the number of installations. Now "essentially zero" becomes "essentially millions".

Plus, with the benefit of the power being produced where it is actually used, you eliminate the cost of building and maintaining the vast majority of infrastructure that would be required for a central plant.

Except you still need that infrastructure to provide baseband power. If you generate enough solar to power the whole world 24/7, you need power storage, which is *also* cheaper centralized, and so you need a way to get power from all these spread out generation facilities to a storage facility. If you over-generate power, you're losing it and wasting effort building, installing, and maintaining solar panels; to reduce this cost, you need an infrastructure to move that power back and forth between generation cites--rooftops.

It turns out we already have that infrastructure, so the point on building it is moot. You still have to account for maintenance: is maintaining infrastructure cheaper or more expensive than installing and maintaining incrementally more overgeneration and storage facilities at every single individual home (because you absolutely need that infrastructure if even one home doesn't generate their own power)?

The land in question is already being used for something else: housing

Doesn't look like it to me.

Maybe you should try applying reading comprehension above the level of a brain-damaged retard. I suggest you learn to read white space; this may help when someone compares and contrasts two separate options by putting one in one paragraph and one in another paragraph. If that fails, you can always go back and use the grouped information to identify boundaries from their context."

You've done neither of these, but instead read a discussion comparing two different things in two different paragraphs each starting with a different name for the thing being described as if the attributes of each thing applied to one thing. For example:

Ducks are fowl. They like to fly, they eat fish, and they can swim in water.

Pigs are swine. They wallow in mud and eat god damn anything. Oddly enough, they can also swim.

Your response: "God dammit! Ducks don't wallow in mud; they swim on lakes!"

Go back to first grade and ask them to teach you to read. Really read. I understand they may need to bring in an army of special education professionals, but reading will change your life.

You're producing *at* the point of use.

This wide-area installation is not producing at the point of use, unless they need a huge amount of power.

No, that's explaining the difference between pissing in your cornflakes and pissing in the ocean.

When the statement, "When you spread it out", was made, you were describing pissing in little droplets all over the ocean, instead of pissing in one place.

http://www.extremetech.com/com...

Sourceforge SERVES MALWARE kiddie porn that apk's program stops? Yes http://www.extremetech.com/com...

Most children first exposure of computing is thru Android. Maybe this is not noticeable in the USA but there's like 7 billion people in the world and you can buy an Android phone for a few dollars.

Wow, you really just don't get Apple's business, do you? They don't care about consumers looking for a low end phone, their business is focused on huge profit margins selling at the high end of the market. A big part of Apple's continued growth is due to the fact that the iPhone's high price and reputation makes it a status symbol in Asia. Tarnishing that with ultra low-end products won't help them. They'd rather sell one iPhone at $200 profit than 10 Android phones at $10 profit.

(actually, this article claims LG's profit margin has dropped to $0.01 per Android phone. And HTC has lost so much money selling them they are on the verge of bankruptcy).

Market share doesn't really matter in this case, it's the portion of the market they control that matters. And even if that weren't the case, as long as the total market is increasing all companies can grow regardless of market share changes.

Most importantly, having all your keystrokes

More trash-talk.

Having all the keystrokes sent is another myth. Windows can send some typing and inking samples to improve recognition. It's not a full keylogger. They also very clearly ask during setup if you want to use it.

Look, guys. Windows 10 certainly does not offer perfect privacy, but it's not a monster which steals all your data either. Most of the stuff is just some basic hardware statistics and settings synchronization across devices.

Because it spies on all your shit.

Just chuck these settings off during setup and you're good.

FUCK FORBES! http://www.extremetech.com/int...
This behavior will stop.. this is our internet.

And in protest, you posted a link to a site that doesn't deliver content unless you permit them to run scripts. Indignance on the internet? YOU FAIL IT! I got the headline, so I know what the story was about, but I'm not going to enable scripts just because extremetech is shit at HTML. They can fuck off and die with Forbes, and all the other dipshits crapping all over the web with their shit scripts.

This behavior will stop.. this is our internet.

Researchers create fiber network that operates at 99.7% speed of light, smashes speed and latency records 2013 http://www.extremetech.com/com...

Let's not exaggerate. The operating system can send some typing and inking samples if you intentionally leave the setting on during setup. There is nothing that logs all keyboard/mouse activity.

They backported all that crap to 7 you know.

http://www.extremetech.com/com...

And I removed every one of those updates on my Windows 7 PC, disabled any form of automatic updates, and no longer update the box at all. Right now, I don't care that Windows 7 support runs out in 2020. Now that Microsoft patches are indistinguishable from malware, Windows 7 support has already ended, as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not worried about viruses either; Windows is only for gaming, Linux and/or Mac for anything important. If and when I need to replace my gaming system and Windows 7 is no longer available, well, there's always Playstation.

They backported all that crap to 7 you know.
http://www.extremetech.com/com...

"you can still get 7 or 8.1 on most systems"
You haven't heard? Windows 10 Telemetry and spyware have been backported to Windows 7 and 8.
http://www.extremetech.com/com...

>> Random marketing head says now THIS is last desktop OS Um...Microsoft CEO Nadella said that Windows 10 was already going to be this great converged OS...back in 2014. http://www.extremetech.com/gam...

http://hackaday.com/2010/03/31...

http://hackaday.com/2013/03/14...

http://hackaday.com/2013/03/18...

http://www.extremetech.com/com...

https://www.avforums.com/threa...

Most any WiFi firmware artificially limits the radio -> http://www.qsl.net/kb9mwr/proj...

http://www.ilounge.com/index.p...

Whoa, your car has hidden features? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Extra cores on your CPU? No way! http://www.bit-tech.net/hardwa...

Cripple phone features? Oh noes! https://www.techdirt.com/artic... https://www.techdirt.com/artic...

More than one HAM radio have been found to be subject to software tweaking for improvements in scan speed and frequencies covered.-> https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

Got a RAID card? Some of them can be crossflashed to gain features BTW. Or you can pay thousands to the manufacturer for some features (*cough*PERC*cough*) http://www.servethehome.com/ib...

Gains can be had by flashing custom firmware to your DVD\BD RW drives but I didn't feel like spending any time past a cursory search to find this. http://binflash.cdfreaks.com/ http://www.rpc1.org/viewtopic.... http://dvrflash.rpc1.org/

Firmware being used in external HDD has also been found to be crippled vs a standard drive, this didn't used to always be the case....

Here's one that's just an upgrade with features the manufacturer didn't include (see also ANY Jailbreaking post ever)

http://lifehacker.com/find-out...
http://lifehacker.com/5942229/...
http://www.digitaltrends.com/p...

Oh look, your camera now supports RAW? Thought that was only for pro cameras not P&S pocket models...

I could go on and on with examples but suffice it to say yeah it DOES happen and it happens fairly often. It happens most often with system that have a full OS, often Linux, where a firmware flash can give you all sorts of features (OpenWRT or Tomato anyone?) but it also happens in cameras, lab bench tools, TVs, stereos, and just about anything else that is driven by software. Want more turbo boost in your car? Software baby! Want that printer to register an empty toner cartridge sooner? No problem!

Tired now, think I've made my point?

NASA’s cold fusion tech could put a nuclear reactor in every home, car, and plane

If only they could get it to start blocking these [Now] or [Later] dark pattern pop-ups I have been getting!

You're missing the point. People have been using 3rd party bulbs for years, and they are working in their setup. Then, they get prompted to update the firmware of the bridge, and, in doing so, can now suddenly not use these bulbs. It was not announced. It was not listed in the changelog.

They are taking something away. It has nothing to do with security, since they are inherently insecure as it is:

http://www.extremetech.com/ele...

There is, but it was patented and nobody sells them.

https://techreport.com/news/27...

http://www.extremetech.com/ext...

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

Is there any "smart" TV that actually works well?

Short answer: no.
Long answer: analyse this release: http://www.extremetech.com/com...
Samsung's new Quad Core TV is fast enough to be smart. Now let that sink in a bit. These systems are so incredibly poorly coded that they actually *require* a quad core processor to be usable.

Disregarding the absurdity of reading a news article on the TV from the couch, or typing in characters into a Youtube search using a TV remote, the Smart TVs on the market are outright slow and painful to use. Really painful. Like screw it I'll go get my phone to watch this youtube video scale of painful.

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

Oh yeah, in corporate America, profits are too important, no corporation would think ahead to landing on Mars. Oh wait, except this one. Seems there's a flaw in your understanding of America.

14nm for these chips puts us close to the end of currently deployed technologies for transistor densities.

"The path beyond 14nm is treacherous, and by no means a sure thing, but with roadmaps from Intel and Applied Materials both hinting that 5nm is being research, we remain hopeful. Perhaps the better question to ask, though, is whether itâ(TM)s worth scaling to such tiny geometries. With each step down, the process becomes ever more complex, and thus more expensive and more likely to be plagued by low yields. There may be better gains to be had from moving sideways, to materials and architectures that can operate at faster frequencies and with more parallelism, rather than brute-forcing the continuation of Mooreâ(TM)s law."

http://www.extremetech.com/com...

Extremetech had a decent article about this a couple of days ago (currently at 1013 comments and rising)

Link

Full disclosure: I have no kind of attachment to extremetech, other than enjoying their articles which appear to be rather more insightful than most of the tech press out there

> I'm sick and tired of the Microsoft is evil crap.

Sticking your head in the sand doesn't make the problem go away.

1. Maybe if Microsoft would come clean with how much data they collect people might actually trust them again.

Microsoft also provides some country specific domains such as .co.uk, .fr, .it, .de, .es, .th, .tk, .co.jp
* Currently all e-mail service customer data is stored in the U.S. even if the account name contains a country specific domain.

2. Gee, nice to know MS is back porting their privacy-invading Windows 10 features to Windows 7, 8.

Every time you turn around MS is selling you out.

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

---

YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

I finished YOU WITH IT all above!

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

---

YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

I finished YOU WITH IT all above!

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

---

YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

I finished YOU WITH IT all above!

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

---

YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

I finished YOU WITH IT all above!

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

---

YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

I finished YOU WITH IT all above!

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

"uBlock is using 33MB of RAM" - by andymadigan (792996) on Friday June 12, 2015 @10:31PM (#49902053)

Inefficient: Hosts @ 3-11mb w/ current data & does things adblock variants can't & U RAN FROM IT http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... ).

UBlock uses 63++ MB & AdBlock = 128mb++ -> http://www.ghacks.net/2014/06/...

SCREENSHOT -> http://cdn.ghacks.net/wp-conte...

BEST UBlock's done = 38mb/ABP = 64mb -> http://www.extremetech.com/wp-... From http://www.extremetech.com/wp-...

* See 'p.s.' below - Says all (& I didn't do the saying!)

---

"which blocks more ads? Answer: uBlock/Adblock" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

WRONG - "Almost ALL Ads Blocked"'s PAID NOT TO by default-> http://techcrunch.com/2013/07/...

&

ABP too http://finance.yahoo.com/news/...

UBlock/Adblock = far less efficient on CPU & RAM (added messagepassing, SLOW usermode vs. hosts in kernelmode) & NEITHER does a fraction of what hosts do in more speed, security, reliability, & anonymity.

---

"your system blocks fewer ads" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

See above: + hosts do MORE w/ less via 1st link above!

---

"I'm more than happy to spend an extra 1% of my computer's power to block far more ads than your shitty idea" by andymadigan (792996) on Sunday June 14, 2015 @12:04AM (#49907001)

You're 'happy' being illogical & stupid?

AdBlock's 4++gb & 100% CPU use inefficiency -> https://blog.mozilla.org/nneth...

+

ClarityRay defeats it & NOT hosts (clarityray BLOCKS addons via native browser methods).

---

YOU started it -> http://apple.slashdot.org/comm... & here too http://slashdot.org/comments.p...

I finished YOU WITH IT all above!

APK

P.S.=> Howard Stark in "Capt. America" - hosts (Cap's Shield) vs. AdBlock & variants (steel):

"It's stronger than steel & 1/3rd the weight"

So

"Run, Forrest: RUN!!!" & "eat your words"

... apk

The games aren't slow. The OS isn't slow. It's the graphics drivers.

No, it is a combination of all of those things as has been explained many times before. Like here for instance.

Because they already know direct x and probably don't know opengl.

Most game developers work directly with the engine which most often has multiple rendering backends to target OpenGL (desktop and sometimes ES), DirectX (predominantly a 9, 10/11 and now 12 path), GCM, GNMX, GX and now some with Metal support too. This has the effect of both abstracting them from the low level API and enabling them to target different platforms with the same codebase. Moreover GCM, GNMX, GX are all very similar to OpenGL, targeting iOS has up until recently been only OpenGL as has Android and it is also an option for Windows. The only DirectX-exclusive platforms among all of these are XBox and Windows Phone.

Because direct x is what is primarily targeted and optimized by graphics card drivers with opengl a secondary consideration.

No, not really.

And lastly because sound is then organized into the same library whereas with opengl they would then need to pick a secondary sound library.

Easy choice, OpenAL. Not really a barrier.

OpenGL is an api, it has no performance characteristics, those all come down to the implementation.

This is the same as any graphics API but the specification most definitely has performance characteristics that impact the implementation no matter who produces it. Resource and state management for example.

Microsoft has no interest in opengl performing well on windows therefore they don't expend any effort to make it perform well and thereby cripple it relative to their own library.

Microsoft doesn't cripple OpenGL, the OpenGL implementation is provided by the hardware vendors, not Microsoft. But I would be interested to see why/how you think they cripple performance of OpenGL, here is some evidence to the contrary.

The same things are profitable for all of them, if they all pursue what is most profitable for themselves the result will be all of them engaging in the same practice and screwing the consumer.

Well yes a for-profit company is supposed to act in the interest of maximizing profits for shareholders. I'm not sure what "screwing the consumer" means in this instance - you'll have to be more specific - but if it's that bad and there is a path that doesn't screw the user then as long as it can still create at least some profit then consumers will flock to it and the company will benefit. But if your view is that "screwing the consumer" == "not free of charge" then obviously this isn't compatible with for-profit companies.

No, he's not. If you google, you find that the architecture seems to be: key is created by manufacturer. Key is ideally locked up behind a user passphrase. User enters passphrase, key is available to drive. But you can't change the key, and they were the ones that made it.

Like here:
http://www.extremetech.com/com...

Why not post a link to something that shows another hard drive with a key that is variable and never exposed in plaintext to the manufacturer?