Search
Search the archive with full-text matching across story titles, bodies,
and comments. Phrases are quoted; or, -word,
and parentheses behave as in a web search. Queries must be at least
3 characters.
Search the archive with full-text matching across story titles, bodies,
and comments. Phrases are quoted; or, -word,
and parentheses behave as in a web search. Queries must be at least
3 characters.
Under my rules you'd be locked up? Well, ok, maybe for being criminally stupid and attempting to libel me, sure. Definitely not for being a freak, though. As far as I'm concerned, you're more than welcome to abuse yourself as much as you want. Just don't surb-stomp any puppies, and we're golden.
Let me know when either of these can get me from the Chicago Surbs to Downtown Chicago (45 miles) for under $10.
Or from the far north part of the city to the south part (25-30 miles) with 4 lights per mile for $2.50
Yeah, they aren't really competing with each other for trips like that. There is certainly competition for rides around downtown. The new Ventra fare card system (which had an awful rollout but is now quite solid) has allowed the RTA to more accurately count trips - previously certain types of transfers would mean that a single trip was counted multiple times. And during the rollout, technical problems caused bus drivers to allow anyone in physical possession of a fare card to ride for free, uncounted. Thus it is nearly impossible to compare old data to new and determine how much they are affecting each other.
It should also be noted that Uber fares in Chicago are far lower than fares in other big cities, so it's not really reasonable to extrapolate findings from other cities to Chicago and vice versa.
Let me know when either of these can get me from the Chicago Surbs to Downtown Chicago (45 miles) for under $10.
Or from the far north part of the city to the south part (25-30 miles) with 4 lights per mile for $2.50
Sovetakan azad ashkharh Hayastan,
Bazum darer dazhan champ’a du ants’ar,
K’aj vordik’ k’o mak’ar’ets’in k’ez hamar,
Vor dar’nas du mayr Hayrenik’ hayut’yan.
Krknerg:
P’ar’k’ k’ez, misht p’ar’k’ Sovetakan Hayastan,
Ashkhataser, chartaragorts-shinarar,
Zhoghovrdots’ surb dashink’ov ansasan,
Du tsaghkum yes yev kertum luys apagad.
Did you mean seibert?
Suggestions:seibert surbet su bert su-bert sub ert sub-ert sube rt sube-rt subvert shubert suabort surbeat sabet hubert sobeit suberate suberite sbtt sbwt sublet subnet subset abert ibert sbt sebat snert subduer sunet uberty bert sawbet sber schubert sert sorbet subbed sube subito suet surbed zibetFor better results, try our search tips.
Folks,
You can rant and rave all you want, but let's face one fact: high end graphics cards are a very limited market item.
Think about it: how much do the best graphics cards using the nVidia GeForce2 series chipset cost? Well over US$300.
The thing here is that for the majority of computer users, they don't NEED that level of 3-D graphics acceleration.
With the advent of the Intel i81x series of motherboard chipsets with built-in graphics functions, that is more than enough for the average home user who uses the computer to surb the Web, run business applications, and the majority of games. The current Intel i815E chipset actually has a pretty decent on-board graphics accelerator--Anandtech and others who have tested the on-board video were pleasantly surprised that it worked reasonably well.
The reason why 3dfx failed was because their products never recovered from the debacle of the Voodoo3 series, which were overtaken by the nVidia Riva TNT/TNT2/TNT2 Ultra series a few years ago. The arrival of the nVidia GeForce series effectively sealed the doom of 3dfx.
Right now, only ATI and Matrox are the serious competitors left. ATI's latest Radeon chipset is actually very good, and Matrox's G450 chipset is also quite good.