Your not kidding. This A31 is an unbelievable machine. After five years of solid use, I still get about forty minutes out of the battery every time I unplug it. This thing has been dropped more times than I can count, and throughout college had beer and water spilled on it numerous times - and it hasn't had a single issue. Not one.
Your also right about not sending in my money. After looking at the website some more, odds are very high this is a scam. Normally I would pick right up on that. I guess the fact that it made it onto Slashdot threw me off.
The specifications on this seem pretty impressive for a laptop only costing $150:
From the website:
*Intel® Celeron® M Processor 370 (1.5 GHz, 90nm, FSB400, 1 MB L2 cache, uPGA478)
*14.0" WXGA (1280x768) TFT
*40 GB hard drive
*6 cell lithium ion battery
*64-bit wide DDR data channel, One 200-pin SODIMM socket, supporting DDR 333/400, 256 MB Expandable up to 1GB, based on SODIMM Modules
*One changeable 2.5" 9.5mm(H) HDD, Supporting Master mode IDE ATA-33/66/100/133 (Ultra DMA), One changeable 12.7mm(H) CD/DVD Combo
*VIA PN800 integration, Shared Memory Architecture up to 64MB, 128 bit 3D graphic engine, Support analog monitor pixel resolution up to 1920x1400, Support two displays dual view
*A4 size keyboard, Built-in Touchpad with scrolling function
*AC'97 2.2 Compliant Interface, 3D stereo enhanced sound system, Sound-Blaster PROTM Compatible, S/PDIF Digital output (5.1 CH), 1x Built-in Microphone, 2x Built-in Speakers
*3x USB 2.0 ports, 1x External CRT monitor output, 1x Headphone jack, 1x Microphone jack, 1x S/PDIF output jack, 1x RJ-45 port for LAN, 1x Line-in jack, 1x DC-In jack
*1x Type II PCMCIA socket
*10/100BASE-TX Fast Ethernet on board, 802.11g MiniPCI Wireless LAN
*Full Range 65W AC adapter - AC input 100~240V, 47~63Hz, DC output 20V, 3.25A, Removable 6-cell Smart Li-ion battery pack, 4000/4400mAh
*Kensington® Lock
Those specs are actually pretty close to what my OEM ThinkPad A31 was, when it was shipped. Although I upgraded the RAM, those specs are otherwise still pretty close, and that laptop still runs XP incredibly smoothly. While I'm not saying people should put XP on this thing, using a Windows product as a benchmark for smooth performance is generally a good way to determine how well linux will run on a machine. Considering the integrated wireless card, "pre-installed office and multimedia applications", and the DVD player, this thing seems like an ideal machine for someone on the go who doesn't want to worry about their equipment too much.
It's also a perfect way to learn linux, if you don't already have an old(er) computer lying around you can toss the OS onto. I will probably buy it for that exact reason. Now if somebody would just do something about that website so I don't worry I'm getting ripped off by some scam artist with poor web writing skills...
I couldn't agree more. While I'm not somebody who has ever subscribed to the belief that "this is the year of linux", I think it might be possible for linux to continue making inroads if it can more quickly capitalize on the 64 bit market. And you're right, the linux offering has to usable by Windows standards, not typical linux user standards. Yeah, most people could probably figure out how to use linux...but the distros just aren't there yet to the point that people actually want to do so. Seems like Ubuntu is heading in the right direction. Hopefully there are others too.
With the inroads Google has been making with its applications, I could easily see them partnering exclusively with a linux distro to really start making a change. While Google could probably make the OS itself, the company might not want that kind of attention. No reason to open themselves up the more scrutiny at this point. Let Ubuntu develop the system, then, with Google's name power, if they endorsed and developed apps. for the OS, it might finally be enough to start being people over. People trust Google. Once a linux distro gets there, maybe that will be enough to finally start persuading (more) people to make the switch.
I could have sworn I read an article on Slashdot recently claiming Vista was the last version of Windows OS which would be released with a 32 bit version?
I'm a supporter! I think the Playstation 3 actually has wonderful potential to be the top notch gaming system in the next couple of years, once developers have learned to better utilize its hardware. It's price point is a turn off, sure, but that will come down...and developers will still be making games for it at that point.
That being said, although I really respect Nintendo for taking a different course and building a new, innovate gaming platform, I am frankly not very impressed with the end result. I wanted to love it, but after playing the Wii a couple of times, I have zero desire to ever go out and buy one. I think its great that games developed for the Wii probably won't be ports from other systems (in the future), because the control scheme is simply too different...I think its just going to take a while for developers to really make this new way of playing games work. That being said, the activity involved isn't a real selling point for me. While I can't speak for anyone else on Slashdot, I suspect I'm not alone when I say I get enough physical activity on my own for said activity to be required when I want to sit down and game.
Back to the PS3, well, I think the SIXAXIS controller is great. It is the perfect shape for utilizing motion sensing for driving or flying games, as you can "turn" it, rather than wave a wand to simulate a driving experience. I'm not knocking the Wii, I'm just stating that a rectangular controller isn't ideally suited for driving or flying simulators...although I'm sure it works well, or will work well in the future.
As a relative newcomer to Slashdot, I don't understand all the hatred out there for Sony. Whatever, I'm sure some of it is well founded, as there are many well informed members on here. I just don't have a real problem with Sony. I loved my PS1 and PS2, and most of my other Sony appliances have been great to me over the years (although I went with Sharp on my new HDTV purchase a week ago). In fact, I have always been surprised there aren't more rabid XBox haters on here, as Microsoft tends to get trashed a lot, for every conceivable reason.
Anyways, to readdress your point: I, for one, still support the PS3. I think it will do great things, and I hope for as much. Now I just have to buy one...something which won't happen for at least another year. But just because I don't have one doesn't mean I don't "support" the system. I might be alone, but there are probably one or two other people on here who feel the way I do.
I browsed through a few comments quickly, and many people seem to be pointing towards Motorola. I would personally highly recommend a "low end" Nokia model.
I worked for Cingular a few years ago, and I never got any complaints from older folks asking for the exact same phone features as your mother. I'm not sure what carrier you're planning to go with, but if you're looking at Cingular, this seems to be the phone closest to what you're mother wants:
The Nokia 2610 -- http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/cel l-phone-details/?device=Nokia+2610&q_sku=sku980158
In my experience with Motorola, they never hold up as well, or for as long, nor are they as durable or easy to use. However, if you want an older Motorola to compare to, which you could probably pick up on EBay, check out the Motorola V180. If memory serves (and it does), that phone will also fit your mothers needs quite nicely. Picking up an older phone could also keep your mom from signing any kind of contract with a carrier, as she could simply use whatever they call their version of "pre-pay" now.
However, if you are considering the EBay route, the phone I would recommend over most others would be the old Nokia 1100. It is exactly what your mother is looking for. Durable, and believe me, other than a rudimentary flashlight, zero other features. Great battery life though. Buy five of them, and when/if one fails, just swap out the SIM card. Show her how to do it, it's very easy on the 1100. But, for whatever carrier you decide to go with, make CERTAIN the phone is either from that carrier, or it at least compatible (unlocked). For Cingular and T-Mobile, they use GSM technology, hence SIM cards. They have to be unlocked.
As for price plans, you're on your own. Good luck!
I think I read somewhere that is actually the plan for the 360...except the Elite will drop by $80. Not sure if that was confirmed out not though. Something about the system "not meeting sales expectations"...?
Hey, I have what might sound like a stupid question, but here goes:
I was always curious why PS1 games didn't seem to load or play any better on a PS2...then I came to find out the PS2 was actually using the same chip set for backwards compatibility. Then it all seemed to make sense.
I figured the same thing would be the case with the PS3 playing PS2 games - using the same chip set, the PS3 would play PS2 games the same as the PS2 did. But now that this specific chip set is being removed, being replaced instead with emulation software to play older games...does this mean the games might actually load faster?
I mean, if its using better hardware, why not? Or will the emulation software have (by necessity) handicaps built it which prevents this from happening? Why or why not?
That's funny, I wonder if "the Phoenix based technology company" also forced Sony to use their software? That would certainly make them liable.
Otherwise, odds are good that company developed for Sony exactly what they were asking for -- as evidenced by Sony actually USING the software. If I were The Amergence Group, I would counter-sue on the platform that Sony approved of and used the software in question, only to blame the makers for Sony's PR problems.
It's a frivolous lawsuit, and one which Sony should have been smart enough to avoid. This will only hurt their image even more. Nobody's buying the idea Sony is the victim here.
Your attitude is out of line. And counter productive. The simple fact of the matter is that the surgeon general we are referring to has zero training in climate science, and is not qualified to speak authoritatively on the subject. While keeping my thoughts and knowledge of global warming out of this discussion, as they're not pertinent, I would ask you to review your concept of "anti-science". Certainly a valid argument could be made that the Bush Administration has taken many stances which conflict with widely accepted scientific thought; i.e. stem cell research, sex education, etc, all of which were referred to in the article. In many respects, this is absurd. However, if you consider yourself open minded, please try to take what I am about to say in that spirit...and refraining from personal attacks may help you in this regard.
"Anti-science", as I understand it, is a stubborn unwillingness to look at data conflicting from your hypothesis (or beliefs), review that data, and reach new conclusions. The simple fact of the matter is that substantial data exists to refute the theory of global warming...yet that information has not leaked into the main stream. We (my generation, and perhaps yours as well) has been raised to believe in the theory of global warming, as evidenced in a variety of ways on a variety of mediums. That doesn't make it true.
Perhaps global warming exists. While not refuting it, I can say with absolute confidence that the evidence refuting this theory is substantial, and worth tremendous consideration. Speaking with the scientific training I have on the subject, I find it amusing that while overall climate has risen roughly.7 Celcius in the last century, many localized area have recorded a degree of cooling. For a "global" theory, this data begs further scrutiny both of itself, and of "global warming" ideas as well.
Perhaps the Bush administration, despite its many failings, is actually considering all sides in this argument? While it may (and probably is) for political reasons, that doesn't invalidate the science. Perhaps, after hearing a medical professional chime in on global warming, they simply decided they had heard enough pseudo opinions on the subject, and didn't want to hear any more from the man. My *guess* is that since he remained in his role of surgeon general after this instance, he still served in the capacity he was designated and qualified for, despite his not being invited back to these meetings.
While few people, in anybody, would claim the Bush administration holds a monopoly on truth, it would appear that in this instance, they're more open minded than you. At least, that's how it appears to the neutral observer not blinded by hysteria.
Oh, and perhaps you could explain to me how a.7 degree rise in temperature over the course of one hundred years has had a demonstrable effect on the health of the American people? And try to do so without blaming droughts and wild fires on global warming, and attributing them to our health. The greatest pandemic of the twentieth century was the spread of the H1N1 strain of influenza in 1918 (unless you count AIDS, but we still don't know the full effects of that, so I'm leaving it out...and H1N1 effected more people anyways), and that cannot possibly be blamed for global warming...so to what are you referring? Future floods? The spread of insect born illness? Tidal waves? Do you really think speculating about that now is productive?, especially when we have so many current health related issues to deal with?
Of course I have seen that photo. And you're right, what I said was incorrect: we did openly support Iraq in that war with Iran. An obvious oversight on my part, and I apologize for it. I got so caught up in pointing out how we did not aid Saddam himself in gaining power, I made a mistake in my other statement. My apologies.
However, from what I've gathered, we did not support Saddamn by providing weaponry or technology. The Wikipedia article you cited does make mention of our providing technology, but its source is no longer available. It seems to me that legitimate sources (not Wikipedia) have settled on our supporting Iraq through use of battle intelligence. I'll do some more searching, but that's what I have seen.
I thought this was an excellent article on that story to which you are referring:
http://www.photius.com/rogue_nations/020818_nyt. html (New York Times, August 17, 2002)
Anyways, thanks for pointing that out. Again, I made a mistake in what I said, and I apologize.
Saddam Hussein was never an ally of the United States...it was the Baathist party we helped to put in party. He simply butchered and murdered his way through the hierarchy, until he reached the top. We had no hand in that, and we didn't do anything to support him once he took over. If anyone has any evidence we supported him in his eight year war with Iran in the 1980's, please provide it.
Second point: according to many sources, Saddam did have chemical and biological weapons in 2002, and early 2003. He moved them through conveys into Syria after a dam burst and most of the countries in the region sent "aid". There are some interesting stories about it available in the main stream, should anyone choose to do the research.
What does this have to do with technology? This story is not Slashdot worthy, in my humble opinion.
I guess the argument could be made that this is yet another example of censorship from the Bush administration, but frankly, it's not a very good one. Since when does the surgeon general speak authoritatively about global warming? I see nothing in his (Dr. Carmona) background which would lead me to believe he had the same depth of knowledge on the subject as the scientists who actually study the theory. The surgeon generals also complained about political pressure, but if we're having an argument based in reality, I'd be curious what political appointment doesn't feel some degree of political pressure.
Nothing new here.
My guess as to why more vendors aren't providing a basic operating system on the computers they ship is simple: they don't want to support it.
Even if nothing goes wrong with the system itself, they probably don't want to field any more calls than they normally get inquiring as to why "software A" isn't on there, or why "software B" doesn't work. And why, exactly, does "software C" keep asking to perform certain functions?
I imagine hardware vendors simply don't want the headache.
Twenty bucks says whoever rated my comment "Overrated" when it was only at "1" to begin with is a pissed off Apple fan. Way to refute what I said and argue your side, instead of knocking it down and running away. Typical.
You are certainly right about people on Slashdot accusing Apple of making sub par machines. But here's the thing:
there's Slashdot, and there's everybody else. While there's no shortage of Apple fanboys here, there is also a plethora of people who know better. This quality is uncommon to the general public, and utterly lacking in Apple's target audience.
Allow me to clarify my previous post: if Apple wishes to grow their market share, they need to diversify their target audience. One incredibly simple way to do this would be to license their OS to Dell or HP, or any other exclusive provider, and provide an economical alternative to Apple's own hardware.
This is why Apple should license their OS to Dell or HP or someone, with an agreement that the vendor only builds "economical" versions of the computer. Or something like that.
At this point in the game, I *think* it unlikely Apple would start building lower end devices, when they seem to be doing quite well with their current business model. I think there's a sense of aristocratic bullshit in the Mac community, which Apple promotes, that buying a Mac puts you above anything being offered by purchasing a PC. Neither Apple, nor its current customers, wants to be tainted with being accused of making sub-par machines.
To which linux distro are you referring? In my admittedly limited experience, it seems that a whole lot less is packed into linux than into Windows. While I have never seen the dreaded blue screen of death when running any linux distro, I have had it freeze.
I'm guessing that Windows has to pack a whole lot more into their systems than typical linux distros do? Security, proprietary stuffs, many redundancies, etc. Another side to it is that while most hardware seems to work with linux, the linux developer is generally under no obligation to ensure things run properly.
Honestly curious to hear what people think on this.
Yes, this is among the first steps Microsoft is taking to ensure a viable product in the future. While this may prove to be a mistake in a long run (and I seriously believe it will be), despite its dominant market share, Microsoft is finding itself pushed into the proverbial corner more and more by the likes of Apple...not Dell or HP.
Laugh all you want, but the simple fact of the matter is that part of why Apple machines run so well is because the operating system is custom built to work with certain hardware. If Microsoft weren't forced to support virtually every piece of hardware on the planet, they wouldn't have so many issues with their software. Essentially, if Windows were able to code to only a select few machines, you can rest assured Windows would be a faster, much more competent, far more efficient operating system.
However, producing their own hardware will most likely prove to be a mistake, at least in the long run. Although they have certain contracts with major manufacturers, (HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc.), those contracts will eventually expire. Although Apple Inc. is unlikely to open up their hardware in the near future, they will likely see an opportunity here to take advantage of the cracks opening in Microsoft's armor. Quite possibly, they will agree to license a version of OS (?) at this point, in order to continue increasing market share. This will not hurt them, as by signing an exclusive contract with say, Dell, they will still be able to code exclusively for certain hardware, all the while offering a cheaper alternative to those who may want to switch over to Apple's excellent OS, while at the same time not being forced to use their quirky hardware (I'm sorry, but Apple hardware seems to use the most delicate parts on the planet, and can be extremely annoying to deal with).
People have said it before, but I do believe we are finally seeing the permanent erosion of Microsoft's domination, especially with operating systems. They have become too bloated, and their is finally a viable alternative commercial product to contend with. Regardless of what you think of Apple and/or Microsoft, this will have both positive and negative effects. However, I believe we will continue to see more and more futile moves by Microsoft to retain what considerable power and influence they currently posses...problem is, they're being forced to fight on at least two major fronts they really have few practical advantages in anymore: services and software. Their services are being challenged by Google and IBM, their software by Apple (amongst many, many others). Microsoft's greatest problem is that these other companies are in many respects doing a better job than Microsoft, for reasons Microsoft will not soon be able to deal with or fix.
All that aside, I still prefer to deal with the devil you see (Microsoft) than the devil you don't (Google).
Maybe...but they would open themselves up to even more scrutiny if they raised their prices, AND failed the subsidize the phone itself. There had to be modicum of fairness built into this pricing, at some point.
On another note, my guess is that AT&T wanted to have higher prices, and Jobs, in his infinite power, wouldn't let them. He stands to make way more money by getting this unit into the hands of the masses. My guess is that the businessman who pick this thing up aren't too keen on iTunes right now...that could very well change if this thing is as easy to use as past Apple products. And it will be.
Slashdot Mirror
Your not kidding. This A31 is an unbelievable machine. After five years of solid use, I still get about forty minutes out of the battery every time I unplug it. This thing has been dropped more times than I can count, and throughout college had beer and water spilled on it numerous times - and it hasn't had a single issue. Not one.
Your also right about not sending in my money. After looking at the website some more, odds are very high this is a scam. Normally I would pick right up on that. I guess the fact that it made it onto Slashdot threw me off.
The specifications on this seem pretty impressive for a laptop only costing $150:
From the website:
*Intel® Celeron® M Processor 370 (1.5 GHz, 90nm, FSB400, 1 MB L2 cache, uPGA478)
*14.0" WXGA (1280x768) TFT
*40 GB hard drive
*6 cell lithium ion battery
*64-bit wide DDR data channel, One 200-pin SODIMM socket, supporting DDR 333/400, 256 MB Expandable up to 1GB, based on SODIMM Modules
*One changeable 2.5" 9.5mm(H) HDD, Supporting Master mode IDE ATA-33/66/100/133 (Ultra DMA), One changeable 12.7mm(H) CD/DVD Combo
*VIA PN800 integration, Shared Memory Architecture up to 64MB, 128 bit 3D graphic engine, Support analog monitor pixel resolution up to 1920x1400, Support two displays dual view
*A4 size keyboard, Built-in Touchpad with scrolling function
*AC'97 2.2 Compliant Interface, 3D stereo enhanced sound system, Sound-Blaster PROTM Compatible, S/PDIF Digital output (5.1 CH), 1x Built-in Microphone, 2x Built-in Speakers
*3x USB 2.0 ports, 1x External CRT monitor output, 1x Headphone jack, 1x Microphone jack, 1x S/PDIF output jack, 1x RJ-45 port for LAN, 1x Line-in jack, 1x DC-In jack
*1x Type II PCMCIA socket
*10/100BASE-TX Fast Ethernet on board, 802.11g MiniPCI Wireless LAN
*Full Range 65W AC adapter - AC input 100~240V, 47~63Hz, DC output 20V, 3.25A, Removable 6-cell Smart Li-ion battery pack, 4000/4400mAh
*Kensington® Lock
Those specs are actually pretty close to what my OEM ThinkPad A31 was, when it was shipped. Although I upgraded the RAM, those specs are otherwise still pretty close, and that laptop still runs XP incredibly smoothly. While I'm not saying people should put XP on this thing, using a Windows product as a benchmark for smooth performance is generally a good way to determine how well linux will run on a machine. Considering the integrated wireless card, "pre-installed office and multimedia applications", and the DVD player, this thing seems like an ideal machine for someone on the go who doesn't want to worry about their equipment too much.
It's also a perfect way to learn linux, if you don't already have an old(er) computer lying around you can toss the OS onto. I will probably buy it for that exact reason. Now if somebody would just do something about that website so I don't worry I'm getting ripped off by some scam artist with poor web writing skills...
I couldn't agree more. While I'm not somebody who has ever subscribed to the belief that "this is the year of linux", I think it might be possible for linux to continue making inroads if it can more quickly capitalize on the 64 bit market. And you're right, the linux offering has to usable by Windows standards, not typical linux user standards. Yeah, most people could probably figure out how to use linux...but the distros just aren't there yet to the point that people actually want to do so. Seems like Ubuntu is heading in the right direction. Hopefully there are others too.
With the inroads Google has been making with its applications, I could easily see them partnering exclusively with a linux distro to really start making a change. While Google could probably make the OS itself, the company might not want that kind of attention. No reason to open themselves up the more scrutiny at this point. Let Ubuntu develop the system, then, with Google's name power, if they endorsed and developed apps. for the OS, it might finally be enough to start being people over. People trust Google. Once a linux distro gets there, maybe that will be enough to finally start persuading (more) people to make the switch.
I could have sworn I read an article on Slashdot recently claiming Vista was the last version of Windows OS which would be released with a 32 bit version?
I'm a supporter! I think the Playstation 3 actually has wonderful potential to be the top notch gaming system in the next couple of years, once developers have learned to better utilize its hardware. It's price point is a turn off, sure, but that will come down...and developers will still be making games for it at that point.
That being said, although I really respect Nintendo for taking a different course and building a new, innovate gaming platform, I am frankly not very impressed with the end result. I wanted to love it, but after playing the Wii a couple of times, I have zero desire to ever go out and buy one. I think its great that games developed for the Wii probably won't be ports from other systems (in the future), because the control scheme is simply too different...I think its just going to take a while for developers to really make this new way of playing games work. That being said, the activity involved isn't a real selling point for me. While I can't speak for anyone else on Slashdot, I suspect I'm not alone when I say I get enough physical activity on my own for said activity to be required when I want to sit down and game.
Back to the PS3, well, I think the SIXAXIS controller is great. It is the perfect shape for utilizing motion sensing for driving or flying games, as you can "turn" it, rather than wave a wand to simulate a driving experience. I'm not knocking the Wii, I'm just stating that a rectangular controller isn't ideally suited for driving or flying simulators...although I'm sure it works well, or will work well in the future.
As a relative newcomer to Slashdot, I don't understand all the hatred out there for Sony. Whatever, I'm sure some of it is well founded, as there are many well informed members on here. I just don't have a real problem with Sony. I loved my PS1 and PS2, and most of my other Sony appliances have been great to me over the years (although I went with Sharp on my new HDTV purchase a week ago). In fact, I have always been surprised there aren't more rabid XBox haters on here, as Microsoft tends to get trashed a lot, for every conceivable reason.
Anyways, to readdress your point: I, for one, still support the PS3. I think it will do great things, and I hope for as much. Now I just have to buy one...something which won't happen for at least another year. But just because I don't have one doesn't mean I don't "support" the system. I might be alone, but there are probably one or two other people on here who feel the way I do.
I browsed through a few comments quickly, and many people seem to be pointing towards Motorola. I would personally highly recommend a "low end" Nokia model.
l l-phone-details/?device=Nokia+2610&q_sku=sku980158
I worked for Cingular a few years ago, and I never got any complaints from older folks asking for the exact same phone features as your mother. I'm not sure what carrier you're planning to go with, but if you're looking at Cingular, this seems to be the phone closest to what you're mother wants:
The Nokia 2610 -- http://www.wireless.att.com/cell-phone-service/ce
In my experience with Motorola, they never hold up as well, or for as long, nor are they as durable or easy to use. However, if you want an older Motorola to compare to, which you could probably pick up on EBay, check out the Motorola V180. If memory serves (and it does), that phone will also fit your mothers needs quite nicely. Picking up an older phone could also keep your mom from signing any kind of contract with a carrier, as she could simply use whatever they call their version of "pre-pay" now.
However, if you are considering the EBay route, the phone I would recommend over most others would be the old Nokia 1100. It is exactly what your mother is looking for. Durable, and believe me, other than a rudimentary flashlight, zero other features. Great battery life though. Buy five of them, and when/if one fails, just swap out the SIM card. Show her how to do it, it's very easy on the 1100. But, for whatever carrier you decide to go with, make CERTAIN the phone is either from that carrier, or it at least compatible (unlocked). For Cingular and T-Mobile, they use GSM technology, hence SIM cards. They have to be unlocked.
As for price plans, you're on your own. Good luck!
Wow...it's pretty absurd this comment was labeled "Troll". You've gotta love the moderators on this thing.
I think I read somewhere that is actually the plan for the 360...except the Elite will drop by $80. Not sure if that was confirmed out not though. Something about the system "not meeting sales expectations"...?
Hey, I have what might sound like a stupid question, but here goes:
I was always curious why PS1 games didn't seem to load or play any better on a PS2...then I came to find out the PS2 was actually using the same chip set for backwards compatibility. Then it all seemed to make sense.
I figured the same thing would be the case with the PS3 playing PS2 games - using the same chip set, the PS3 would play PS2 games the same as the PS2 did. But now that this specific chip set is being removed, being replaced instead with emulation software to play older games...does this mean the games might actually load faster?
I mean, if its using better hardware, why not? Or will the emulation software have (by necessity) handicaps built it which prevents this from happening? Why or why not?
That's funny, I wonder if "the Phoenix based technology company" also forced Sony to use their software? That would certainly make them liable.
Otherwise, odds are good that company developed for Sony exactly what they were asking for -- as evidenced by Sony actually USING the software. If I were The Amergence Group, I would counter-sue on the platform that Sony approved of and used the software in question, only to blame the makers for Sony's PR problems.
It's a frivolous lawsuit, and one which Sony should have been smart enough to avoid. This will only hurt their image even more. Nobody's buying the idea Sony is the victim here.
Your attitude is out of line. And counter productive. The simple fact of the matter is that the surgeon general we are referring to has zero training in climate science, and is not qualified to speak authoritatively on the subject. While keeping my thoughts and knowledge of global warming out of this discussion, as they're not pertinent, I would ask you to review your concept of "anti-science". Certainly a valid argument could be made that the Bush Administration has taken many stances which conflict with widely accepted scientific thought; i.e. stem cell research, sex education, etc, all of which were referred to in the article. In many respects, this is absurd. However, if you consider yourself open minded, please try to take what I am about to say in that spirit...and refraining from personal attacks may help you in this regard.
.7 Celcius in the last century, many localized area have recorded a degree of cooling. For a "global" theory, this data begs further scrutiny both of itself, and of "global warming" ideas as well.
.7 degree rise in temperature over the course of one hundred years has had a demonstrable effect on the health of the American people? And try to do so without blaming droughts and wild fires on global warming, and attributing them to our health. The greatest pandemic of the twentieth century was the spread of the H1N1 strain of influenza in 1918 (unless you count AIDS, but we still don't know the full effects of that, so I'm leaving it out...and H1N1 effected more people anyways), and that cannot possibly be blamed for global warming...so to what are you referring? Future floods? The spread of insect born illness? Tidal waves? Do you really think speculating about that now is productive?, especially when we have so many current health related issues to deal with?
"Anti-science", as I understand it, is a stubborn unwillingness to look at data conflicting from your hypothesis (or beliefs), review that data, and reach new conclusions. The simple fact of the matter is that substantial data exists to refute the theory of global warming...yet that information has not leaked into the main stream. We (my generation, and perhaps yours as well) has been raised to believe in the theory of global warming, as evidenced in a variety of ways on a variety of mediums. That doesn't make it true.
Perhaps global warming exists. While not refuting it, I can say with absolute confidence that the evidence refuting this theory is substantial, and worth tremendous consideration. Speaking with the scientific training I have on the subject, I find it amusing that while overall climate has risen roughly
Perhaps the Bush administration, despite its many failings, is actually considering all sides in this argument? While it may (and probably is) for political reasons, that doesn't invalidate the science. Perhaps, after hearing a medical professional chime in on global warming, they simply decided they had heard enough pseudo opinions on the subject, and didn't want to hear any more from the man. My *guess* is that since he remained in his role of surgeon general after this instance, he still served in the capacity he was designated and qualified for, despite his not being invited back to these meetings.
While few people, in anybody, would claim the Bush administration holds a monopoly on truth, it would appear that in this instance, they're more open minded than you. At least, that's how it appears to the neutral observer not blinded by hysteria.
Oh, and perhaps you could explain to me how a
Of course I have seen that photo. And you're right, what I said was incorrect: we did openly support Iraq in that war with Iran. An obvious oversight on my part, and I apologize for it. I got so caught up in pointing out how we did not aid Saddam himself in gaining power, I made a mistake in my other statement. My apologies.
. html (New York Times, August 17, 2002)
However, from what I've gathered, we did not support Saddamn by providing weaponry or technology. The Wikipedia article you cited does make mention of our providing technology, but its source is no longer available. It seems to me that legitimate sources (not Wikipedia) have settled on our supporting Iraq through use of battle intelligence. I'll do some more searching, but that's what I have seen.
I thought this was an excellent article on that story to which you are referring:
http://www.photius.com/rogue_nations/020818_nyt
Anyways, thanks for pointing that out. Again, I made a mistake in what I said, and I apologize.
*we helped put in power.* Sorry.
Saddam Hussein was never an ally of the United States...it was the Baathist party we helped to put in party. He simply butchered and murdered his way through the hierarchy, until he reached the top. We had no hand in that, and we didn't do anything to support him once he took over. If anyone has any evidence we supported him in his eight year war with Iran in the 1980's, please provide it.
Second point: according to many sources, Saddam did have chemical and biological weapons in 2002, and early 2003. He moved them through conveys into Syria after a dam burst and most of the countries in the region sent "aid". There are some interesting stories about it available in the main stream, should anyone choose to do the research.
What does this have to do with technology? This story is not Slashdot worthy, in my humble opinion.
I guess the argument could be made that this is yet another example of censorship from the Bush administration, but frankly, it's not a very good one. Since when does the surgeon general speak authoritatively about global warming? I see nothing in his (Dr. Carmona) background which would lead me to believe he had the same depth of knowledge on the subject as the scientists who actually study the theory. The surgeon generals also complained about political pressure, but if we're having an argument based in reality, I'd be curious what political appointment doesn't feel some degree of political pressure. Nothing new here.
My guess as to why more vendors aren't providing a basic operating system on the computers they ship is simple: they don't want to support it.
Even if nothing goes wrong with the system itself, they probably don't want to field any more calls than they normally get inquiring as to why "software A" isn't on there, or why "software B" doesn't work. And why, exactly, does "software C" keep asking to perform certain functions?
I imagine hardware vendors simply don't want the headache.
Maybe he means he actually physically "got burned"? After using my little brother's MacBook Pro for about an hour, I wouldn't be especially surprised.
Twenty bucks says whoever rated my comment "Overrated" when it was only at "1" to begin with is a pissed off Apple fan. Way to refute what I said and argue your side, instead of knocking it down and running away. Typical.
You are certainly right about people on Slashdot accusing Apple of making sub par machines. But here's the thing:
there's Slashdot, and there's everybody else. While there's no shortage of Apple fanboys here, there is also a plethora of people who know better. This quality is uncommon to the general public, and utterly lacking in Apple's target audience.
Allow me to clarify my previous post: if Apple wishes to grow their market share, they need to diversify their target audience. One incredibly simple way to do this would be to license their OS to Dell or HP, or any other exclusive provider, and provide an economical alternative to Apple's own hardware.
This is why Apple should license their OS to Dell or HP or someone, with an agreement that the vendor only builds "economical" versions of the computer. Or something like that.
At this point in the game, I *think* it unlikely Apple would start building lower end devices, when they seem to be doing quite well with their current business model. I think there's a sense of aristocratic bullshit in the Mac community, which Apple promotes, that buying a Mac puts you above anything being offered by purchasing a PC. Neither Apple, nor its current customers, wants to be tainted with being accused of making sub-par machines.
Just my two cents.
Oh man, how perfect is this? Now when their hard drives explode, the computer will be able to put itself out!
I was looking a good card in this price range, thank you for the suggestion and link.
To which linux distro are you referring? In my admittedly limited experience, it seems that a whole lot less is packed into linux than into Windows. While I have never seen the dreaded blue screen of death when running any linux distro, I have had it freeze.
I'm guessing that Windows has to pack a whole lot more into their systems than typical linux distros do? Security, proprietary stuffs, many redundancies, etc. Another side to it is that while most hardware seems to work with linux, the linux developer is generally under no obligation to ensure things run properly.
Honestly curious to hear what people think on this.
Yes, this is among the first steps Microsoft is taking to ensure a viable product in the future. While this may prove to be a mistake in a long run (and I seriously believe it will be), despite its dominant market share, Microsoft is finding itself pushed into the proverbial corner more and more by the likes of Apple...not Dell or HP.
Laugh all you want, but the simple fact of the matter is that part of why Apple machines run so well is because the operating system is custom built to work with certain hardware. If Microsoft weren't forced to support virtually every piece of hardware on the planet, they wouldn't have so many issues with their software. Essentially, if Windows were able to code to only a select few machines, you can rest assured Windows would be a faster, much more competent, far more efficient operating system.
However, producing their own hardware will most likely prove to be a mistake, at least in the long run. Although they have certain contracts with major manufacturers, (HP, Dell, Lenovo, etc.), those contracts will eventually expire. Although Apple Inc. is unlikely to open up their hardware in the near future, they will likely see an opportunity here to take advantage of the cracks opening in Microsoft's armor. Quite possibly, they will agree to license a version of OS (?) at this point, in order to continue increasing market share. This will not hurt them, as by signing an exclusive contract with say, Dell, they will still be able to code exclusively for certain hardware, all the while offering a cheaper alternative to those who may want to switch over to Apple's excellent OS, while at the same time not being forced to use their quirky hardware (I'm sorry, but Apple hardware seems to use the most delicate parts on the planet, and can be extremely annoying to deal with).
People have said it before, but I do believe we are finally seeing the permanent erosion of Microsoft's domination, especially with operating systems. They have become too bloated, and their is finally a viable alternative commercial product to contend with. Regardless of what you think of Apple and/or Microsoft, this will have both positive and negative effects. However, I believe we will continue to see more and more futile moves by Microsoft to retain what considerable power and influence they currently posses...problem is, they're being forced to fight on at least two major fronts they really have few practical advantages in anymore: services and software. Their services are being challenged by Google and IBM, their software by Apple (amongst many, many others). Microsoft's greatest problem is that these other companies are in many respects doing a better job than Microsoft, for reasons Microsoft will not soon be able to deal with or fix.
All that aside, I still prefer to deal with the devil you see (Microsoft) than the devil you don't (Google).
Maybe...but they would open themselves up to even more scrutiny if they raised their prices, AND failed the subsidize the phone itself. There had to be modicum of fairness built into this pricing, at some point.
On another note, my guess is that AT&T wanted to have higher prices, and Jobs, in his infinite power, wouldn't let them. He stands to make way more money by getting this unit into the hands of the masses. My guess is that the businessman who pick this thing up aren't too keen on iTunes right now...that could very well change if this thing is as easy to use as past Apple products. And it will be.