The bigger question would be: Is it possible to create an orbit around a binary system where a planet has a stable enough environment for harboring life?
Maybe not with the Elite vs Premium, but I can think of many situations where a game might not run on the Core. My point was, if people have to check the hardware-requirements before buying a console-game, they might as well run games on their PCs instead.
And I don't put it beyond MS to release a Ultimate-edition a year o two from now, maybe with more RAM or something. It seems like just the kind of stupid thing they'd do...
We are free to use any ideas, concepts, techniques, know-how in your Communications for any purpose, including, but not limited to, the development and use of products and services based on the Communications. So, If I've written a paper and it includes a really great idea or design I've come up with, I automatically grant them the right to use my that for creating a product based on it if my school forces me to submit my paper to Turnitin? That's just idiotic. Who in their right mind would agree to such terms?
So... The FPS-heads will just connect a keyboard and a mouse to their consoles. If the developers aren't idiots and design their games as if the consoles had no usb-ports that is.
Partly, the bitching is about that they keep changing the specs. This is a game-console. Game-consoles biggest (only?) advantage over gaming-PC's is that they're non-moving targets for developers. Yesterday, develpers could simply assume that everyone with console-x had hardware-x. Consumers could assume that any game for console-x would run on their console-x, since it was the same machine no matter which year they bought it. I can buy a PS2 today and run any game from 2000 on it and run any game from 2007 on my ps2 from 2002. Now, MS and Sony are eroding this advantage by having different versions of their consoles at launch-date and even more by changing the specs of the systems after launch. One wonders if we'll be able to run any game from 2012 on a core XB360 of today...
Yeah, it's better to let a thousand years of hatred fester another thousand, rather than try to do anything at all against it. Bush is the stupid one. Well... Since his "solution" seems to center around making the former US-hating people hate it even more, and in the same stroke make most of the rest of the world resent the US, I'd say yes. He is the stupid one. Violence, coercion and threats is never a good way to make someone like or respect you. I fact, it'll almost always have the opposite effect. There are some people who won't listen to you unless you've got them under gun-point, but Bush seems to lash out in gross overreaction at anything and everything all the time.
To paraphrase from Dennis Leary's Lock'N Load: "My foreign policy? Fuck you! My domestic policy? Fuuuuuuuck you!"
Seems to me like the good Mr Bush have stolen both his foreign and domestic policies from him. ^_^
The problem is when Country A want to get resources in Country B while paying little or nothing for it and at the same time stopping Country C from getting any of the resources from Country B even if they're willing to pay more than Country A for those resources.
how the hell we'll test it I have no idea. Simple. We just build full scale model of saturn, maybe in a 90-degree solar orbit, and then we try out different spin-rates and other relevant factors. To try out how it scales we can also make different sized models, maybe 2-300 of them ranging from moon-sized to jupiter-sized.
But TFA said that this was a technique applied between the die and the heatspreader, a place you'll rarely touch if you use a cpu with a heatspreader. I'd be a bit wary of forcing away the heatspreder, not to mention that the cpu then would be too low for the heatsink to make proper contact. I don't think that this can be functionally applied to a user-mounted heatsink. As I understood the article, it relies on the micrometer trenches to be exactly aligned with the centre of the die, in order to avoid the X-like clumping behaviour of the particles in the thermal-paste. This kind of precise positioning is unlikely to be achived when manually mounting a heatsink.
Thinking about it, maybe they could have a pattern like this on the topside of the heatspreader too and you could just polish the heatsink instead...
It is impossible to make an Iphone killer since it hasn't been release yet. I is also impossible to compare it to other phones on the market since it isn't on the market yet. When I can stand in a shop and actually try it out, *then* I can compare it to other phones on the market. Paper-specs, pictures and flash-animations are worthless when it comes to deciding if a device is any good or not.
Well, I took a look at the Samsung phone and in my eye, it beats the Iphone hands down in looks. But I also think Apples other hardware are so-so looking... (I have a problem with chrome, white and glossy-plastic designs.)
It also have the advantage of having physical buttons for controllers. Touchscreens may be cool looking, but they suck from an ergonomics and usability point of view. For an example, try using a touchscreen mp3-device in your pocket while riding you bicycle.
The biggest downside I can see with this device is the 64MB MicroSD card that comes with it! Honestly! What are they thinking! And, of course, the MicroSD is at the moment limited to just 2GB, soon to be 4GB.
Just hope they don't do like SonyEricsson and require an adapter to connect the headphones or use non-standard usb cables for computer-sync. =( Let's hear it for industry standards! *the masses cheer* Proprietary connections suck.
Depends on the temperature in the server-room. They tend to be either very warm (not enough AC) or rather cold. Either way, there will be air circulating when the door is opened. But you are of course right. You'd have to keep the door open for a while before any greater amount of exchange is made.
Also, oxygen-starved combustion have a tendency to react almost explosively to a sudden oxygen-feed. Like, say, someone opening the server-room door.
But one would assume that they would still keep a fire-detection system in place. If there's a fire-alarm going a low-oxygen server room, it might be wise to stay out and wait for the professionals to arrive. Too bad regular users usually don't follow this rule when it comes to computer-related problems. =)
Besides, I've seen several articles over the years indicating that mac's have a longer usful life than PC's. If you need more anecdotal evidence my family has 3 macs that originally shipped pre-Mac OS 10 (2 with OS 9.1 and 1 with the last version of OS 8). they are all currently running OS 10.4 and used every day. I also have one that's sitting in the closet that has 10.3 installed on it and the only reason it's in the closet is because I own more computers than there are people in my house hold. This depends on what you use your computer for. Any PC that ran XP fine in 2001 will run XP fine today, especially if you only do office-related work. If you want to play the latest games or do graphics- or cpu-intense work, you'll be better of with modern hardware. Same goes for Mac. Anything that ran OSX fine 2001 will run OSX fine today, unless you want to run the latest games or do graphics- or cpu-intense work.
In office-work (word-processing, web, mail, etc) computers mostly get outdated at major OS-upgrades. My current main-workstation is a 5 year old pc-laptop, my girlfriends is a 6 year old pc-desktop. Both run XP perfectly fine and can even run Vista without complaining too much. (Had to test since I got a free Vista license via MSDN)
So they might get forced to let people opt out of certain channels? Oh, the horror! -sarcasm
I've got ~5 channels right now, because I refuse to pay for 20 crap channels in a "subscription package" when I want 3 or 4 of them! Especially since I've got o subscribe to several packages to get the ones I want, leading me to pay for 30-40 channels to get the 3 or 4 channels I want. We've got digital tv now. The technology to let subscribers pick and chose individual channels are there. Screw the companies that won't let you choose which channels to subscribe to. Give them a big finger and choose *not* to subscribe to their crap!
uhhh... I'm pretty sure a huge ass fine that puts the company into bankruptcy and/or out of business could be equated to a loss in freedoms.
A huge ass fine that puts a company into bankruptcy == A huge ass fine that puts a person in personal bankruptcy. What is needed it a system that halts the company from doing business for a set period of time, preferably while it's board of directors are in prison, if the company is found guilty of crimes that would have put a individual person in prison. The corporation is responsible for the deaths of 200 people? Ok, sentence it for 200-accounts of man-slaughter. That would probably quite promptly stop most corporations from breaking the law in any greater extent.
But that's just the thing. If, say, Dell started shipping Ubunty, or any other dist for that matter, they could have it work perfectly out of the box. No problematic configuration needed. Also, if you bought a Dell-uppgrade, they could deliver install-scripts for it that has been tested for compatability against all their Ubuntu-boxes...
You'd only have to worry about manually editing config-files if you choose to go with unsupported 3'rd party hardware, just like with OS X and, to some extent, Windows.
What would be really good, though, is if all the distributions could agree on a standard system for delivering config-files with hardware. That way, as long as the hardware is autodetected, all you'd have to do is to run the install-script from the installation-cd or download the install-script from the hardware-vendor(Nvidia,Ati,Dell,Creative,Whatever) and you're up and running.
Of course, we could always suggest that non-Mac consumer machines really ought to come with the default install of Ubuntu, which has OO.o installed...
I would suggest OSX-machines to come with OpenOffice pre-installed, too. Better to have a real office-suite installed than just a wordprocessor-capable text-editor. It would also do wonders for introducing people to OpenOffice as an MS-Office alternative, having a major-brand system-provider pre-install it. Since most other are sitting in MS knee, Apple seem to be the one most likely to actually pre-install OO. But on the other hand, they seem have almost as big issues with non-Apple stuff as MS have with non-MS stuff.
Just like you never ever ever, under any circumstances, have to use the command line or edit text config files or the registry by hand in windows? Or in OSX for that matter?
I agree that there is too much of it while using any Linux-distribution so far, but saying that you never ever must have to, is an almost impossible task. Even in Windows and OSX you have to get gritty and edit all kinds of system files from time to time. Ever tried getting ati's Windows-driver-package working on a laptop, for an example? Or tried using a non-apple graphics-card in a Mac?
Chances are, if you've bought a brand-name computer and you're a mainstream user, you'll have a hard time getting 3'rd party hardware working correctly, even though Windows now a days is decently good at handling this if your hardware isn't too new or too old or too "embedded" (laptop hardware)
First off, I have never used a Mac integrated in a corporate network environment. I've only used a Mac professionally as my secondary workstation while working as a network-engineer and second-line support, since some of the users had them, also as stand-alone machines... During this time, I had a local user on the Mac and I never investigated if I could remove this and only have a network user. One critical requirement for a corporate OS is just that. No local users, only network users. Preferably roaming ones, so that I can log into any workstation and have my own setup. Is this possible in OSX?
Regarding OS X will inter-operate perfectly via standard UNIX technologies (NFS, LDAP, etc). If you need an easy-to-admin small server, run OS X server, and all your Linux and Windows clients will be able to use it just fine. and It does. OS X uses standard UNIX tools extensively. Underneath the GUI, it's all GCC, Samba, NFS, Apache, CUPS, etc, etc.
It is unlikely that any medium or large corporation could switch it's entire workstation-population to OSX or any other Unix derivate since there are too much specialized software that's only available for MS Windows. Therefore, most corporation would want to have a centralized user-administration for their OSX and MS Windows workstations. Now, MS is known for not playing nice with non-MS solutions, so the big question is this: Does Apple? Can you integrate OSX well into an existing MS-domain? Or at least make the Apple user-server sync it't user-accounts against a MS-domainserver?
Actually, installing WoW in windows is about an hour or two... If you have all the patches at home, otherwise, it's more. But, of course, you don't have to spend several hours trying to get it to install and then having to install it several times to get it working and then getting banned by blizzard for using linux. (Yeah, I know they no longer do that, but it had to be mentioned.;-)
"Wait, you mean religion might confer some survival advantage? And it's so widespread that..."
Not strange at all. Those with a tendency towards believing in deities falls under control of a "priest", who commands them to kill those who do not, since they are "non believers". Then the priest starts saying that it's their duty to their "god" to have lots of children. Fast forward a few hundred years and the genetic predisposition towards believing in deities will be on overwhelming majority.
I wasn't asking a question. I was making a statement of opinion.
I have owned Apple-hardware. I wanted to run OSX, so I bought a Powerbook. Owned it for ~8-10 months. In my opinion, which is very unpopular amongst most Apple-users, they make great software and crappy hardware. That is the reason I think they should switch from being hardware-centric to being software-centric, so that I can run their great software on my own choice of hardware. As long as they do not, they will not gain me back as a paying customer.
But I do understand that, as long as they depend on hardware-sales for revenue, they can not make a non-proprietary version of OSX. I they did, they'd probably sell a lot less hardware. Doesn't change my opinion, though. =)
Exactly. Apple does not compete directly with Microsoft and won't do until they release an OS that run on industry-standard x86-boxes instead of just Apple-proprietary x86-boxes.
As people who run Apple often tell me when I whine about OSX not running on standard hardware; Apple is a hardware-company who makes an OS so that their customers can have something to run on their boxes, and they put a lot of effort into making it not run on non-apple hardware. Microsoft is a software-company that make an OS so that their customers have something to run MS-software on.
If Apple had been smart, they would have made a version of OSX that could run fine on last generation hardware, the one corporations are using right now, so that when the question of upgrading the corporate OS comes, it stands between upgrading the OS on every workstation to OSX or upgrading the hardware *and* upgrade to Vista on every single workstation.
Slashdot Mirror
This depends.
Will the Parallels VM have it's own IP?
If so, no problems. The OS in the VM will be seen as a unique machine by the server.
The bigger question would be:
Is it possible to create an orbit around a binary system where a planet has a stable enough environment for harboring life?
Maybe not with the Elite vs Premium, but I can think of many situations where a game might not run on the Core.
My point was, if people have to check the hardware-requirements before buying a console-game, they might as well run games on their PCs instead.
And I don't put it beyond MS to release a Ultimate-edition a year o two from now, maybe with more RAM or something.
It seems like just the kind of stupid thing they'd do...
That's just idiotic. Who in their right mind would agree to such terms?
So... The FPS-heads will just connect a keyboard and a mouse to their consoles.
If the developers aren't idiots and design their games as if the consoles had no usb-ports that is.
Partly, the bitching is about that they keep changing the specs.
This is a game-console. Game-consoles biggest (only?) advantage over gaming-PC's is that they're non-moving targets for developers.
Yesterday, develpers could simply assume that everyone with console-x had hardware-x.
Consumers could assume that any game for console-x would run on their console-x, since it was the same machine no matter which year they bought it. I can buy a PS2 today and run any game from 2000 on it and run any game from 2007 on my ps2 from 2002.
Now, MS and Sony are eroding this advantage by having different versions of their consoles at launch-date and even more by changing the specs of the systems after launch.
One wonders if we'll be able to run any game from 2012 on a core XB360 of today...
Violence, coercion and threats is never a good way to make someone like or respect you.
I fact, it'll almost always have the opposite effect.
There are some people who won't listen to you unless you've got them under gun-point, but Bush seems to lash out in gross overreaction at anything and everything all the time.
To paraphrase from Dennis Leary's Lock'N Load:
"My foreign policy? Fuck you! My domestic policy? Fuuuuuuuck you!"
Seems to me like the good Mr Bush have stolen both his foreign and domestic policies from him. ^_^
The problem is when Country A want to get resources in Country B while paying little or nothing for it and at the same time stopping Country C from getting any of the resources from Country B even if they're willing to pay more than Country A for those resources.
We just build full scale model of saturn, maybe in a 90-degree solar orbit, and then we try out different spin-rates and other relevant factors.
To try out how it scales we can also make different sized models, maybe 2-300 of them ranging from moon-sized to jupiter-sized.
Just a small matter of engineering.
But TFA said that this was a technique applied between the die and the heatspreader, a place you'll rarely touch if you use a cpu with a heatspreader.
I'd be a bit wary of forcing away the heatspreder, not to mention that the cpu then would be too low for the heatsink to make proper contact.
I don't think that this can be functionally applied to a user-mounted heatsink.
As I understood the article, it relies on the micrometer trenches to be exactly aligned with the centre of the die, in order to avoid the X-like clumping behaviour of the particles in the thermal-paste.
This kind of precise positioning is unlikely to be achived when manually mounting a heatsink.
Thinking about it, maybe they could have a pattern like this on the topside of the heatspreader too and you could just polish the heatsink instead...
It is impossible to make an Iphone killer since it hasn't been release yet.
I is also impossible to compare it to other phones on the market since it isn't on the market yet.
When I can stand in a shop and actually try it out, *then* I can compare it to other phones on the market.
Paper-specs, pictures and flash-animations are worthless when it comes to deciding if a device is any good or not.
Well, I took a look at the Samsung phone and in my eye, it beats the Iphone hands down in looks.
But I also think Apples other hardware are so-so looking... (I have a problem with chrome, white and glossy-plastic designs.)
It also have the advantage of having physical buttons for controllers.
Touchscreens may be cool looking, but they suck from an ergonomics and usability point of view.
For an example, try using a touchscreen mp3-device in your pocket while riding you bicycle.
The biggest downside I can see with this device is the 64MB MicroSD card that comes with it!
Honestly! What are they thinking!
And, of course, the MicroSD is at the moment limited to just 2GB, soon to be 4GB.
Just hope they don't do like SonyEricsson and require an adapter to connect the headphones or use non-standard usb cables for computer-sync. =(
Let's hear it for industry standards! *the masses cheer*
Proprietary connections suck.
Depends on the temperature in the server-room.
They tend to be either very warm (not enough AC) or rather cold.
Either way, there will be air circulating when the door is opened.
But you are of course right. You'd have to keep the door open for a while before any greater amount of exchange is made.
Also, oxygen-starved combustion have a tendency to react almost explosively to a sudden oxygen-feed.
Like, say, someone opening the server-room door.
But one would assume that they would still keep a fire-detection system in place.
If there's a fire-alarm going a low-oxygen server room, it might be wise to stay out and wait for the professionals to arrive.
Too bad regular users usually don't follow this rule when it comes to computer-related problems. =)
Any PC that ran XP fine in 2001 will run XP fine today, especially if you only do office-related work.
If you want to play the latest games or do graphics- or cpu-intense work, you'll be better of with modern hardware.
Same goes for Mac.
Anything that ran OSX fine 2001 will run OSX fine today, unless you want to run the latest games or do graphics- or cpu-intense work.
In office-work (word-processing, web, mail, etc) computers mostly get outdated at major OS-upgrades.
My current main-workstation is a 5 year old pc-laptop, my girlfriends is a 6 year old pc-desktop.
Both run XP perfectly fine and can even run Vista without complaining too much. (Had to test since I got a free Vista license via MSDN)
So they might get forced to let people opt out of certain channels?
Oh, the horror! -sarcasm
I've got ~5 channels right now, because I refuse to pay for 20 crap channels in a "subscription package" when I want 3 or 4 of them!
Especially since I've got o subscribe to several packages to get the ones I want, leading me to pay for 30-40 channels to get the 3 or 4 channels I want.
We've got digital tv now. The technology to let subscribers pick and chose individual channels are there.
Screw the companies that won't let you choose which channels to subscribe to. Give them a big finger and choose *not* to subscribe to their crap!
uhhh... I'm pretty sure a huge ass fine that puts the company into bankruptcy and/or out of business could be equated to a loss in freedoms.
A huge ass fine that puts a company into bankruptcy == A huge ass fine that puts a person in personal bankruptcy.
What is needed it a system that halts the company from doing business for a set period of time, preferably while it's board of directors are in prison, if the company is found guilty of crimes that would have put a individual person in prison.
The corporation is responsible for the deaths of 200 people? Ok, sentence it for 200-accounts of man-slaughter.
That would probably quite promptly stop most corporations from breaking the law in any greater extent.
But that's just the thing.
) and you're up and running.
If, say, Dell started shipping Ubunty, or any other dist for that matter, they could have it work perfectly out of the box. No problematic configuration needed.
Also, if you bought a Dell-uppgrade, they could deliver install-scripts for it that has been tested for compatability against all their Ubuntu-boxes...
You'd only have to worry about manually editing config-files if you choose to go with unsupported 3'rd party hardware, just like with OS X and, to some extent, Windows.
What would be really good, though, is if all the distributions could agree on a standard system for delivering config-files with hardware.
That way, as long as the hardware is autodetected, all you'd have to do is to run the install-script from the installation-cd or download the install-script from the hardware-vendor(Nvidia,Ati,Dell,Creative,Whatever
Of course, we could always suggest that non-Mac consumer machines really ought to come with the default install of Ubuntu, which has OO.o installed...
I would suggest OSX-machines to come with OpenOffice pre-installed, too.
Better to have a real office-suite installed than just a wordprocessor-capable text-editor.
It would also do wonders for introducing people to OpenOffice as an MS-Office alternative, having a major-brand system-provider pre-install it.
Since most other are sitting in MS knee, Apple seem to be the one most likely to actually pre-install OO.
But on the other hand, they seem have almost as big issues with non-Apple stuff as MS have with non-MS stuff.
Just like you never ever ever, under any circumstances, have to use the command line or edit text config files or the registry by hand in windows?
Or in OSX for that matter?
I agree that there is too much of it while using any Linux-distribution so far, but saying that you never ever must have to, is an almost impossible task.
Even in Windows and OSX you have to get gritty and edit all kinds of system files from time to time. Ever tried getting ati's Windows-driver-package working on a laptop, for an example?
Or tried using a non-apple graphics-card in a Mac?
Chances are, if you've bought a brand-name computer and you're a mainstream user, you'll have a hard time getting 3'rd party hardware working correctly, even though Windows now a days is decently good at handling this if your hardware isn't too new or too old or too "embedded" (laptop hardware)
First off, I have never used a Mac integrated in a corporate network environment.
I've only used a Mac professionally as my secondary workstation while working as a network-engineer and second-line support, since some of the users had them, also as stand-alone machines...
During this time, I had a local user on the Mac and I never investigated if I could remove this and only have a network user.
One critical requirement for a corporate OS is just that. No local users, only network users. Preferably roaming ones, so that I can log into any workstation and have my own setup.
Is this possible in OSX?
Regarding
OS X will inter-operate perfectly via standard UNIX technologies (NFS, LDAP, etc). If you need an easy-to-admin small server, run OS X server, and all your Linux and Windows clients will be able to use it just fine.
and
It does. OS X uses standard UNIX tools extensively. Underneath the GUI, it's all GCC, Samba, NFS, Apache, CUPS, etc, etc.
It is unlikely that any medium or large corporation could switch it's entire workstation-population to OSX or any other Unix derivate since there are too much specialized software that's only available for MS Windows.
Therefore, most corporation would want to have a centralized user-administration for their OSX and MS Windows workstations.
Now, MS is known for not playing nice with non-MS solutions, so the big question is this:
Does Apple? Can you integrate OSX well into an existing MS-domain? Or at least make the Apple user-server sync it't user-accounts against a MS-domainserver?
Actually, installing WoW in windows is about an hour or two... If you have all the patches at home, otherwise, it's more. ;-)
But, of course, you don't have to spend several hours trying to get it to install and then having to install it several times to get it working and then getting banned by blizzard for using linux. (Yeah, I know they no longer do that, but it had to be mentioned.
"Wait, you mean religion might confer some survival advantage? And it's so widespread that..."
Not strange at all.
Those with a tendency towards believing in deities falls under control of a "priest", who commands them to kill those who do not, since they are "non believers".
Then the priest starts saying that it's their duty to their "god" to have lots of children.
Fast forward a few hundred years and the genetic predisposition towards believing in deities will be on overwhelming majority.
I wasn't asking a question.
I was making a statement of opinion.
I have owned Apple-hardware. I wanted to run OSX, so I bought a Powerbook. Owned it for ~8-10 months.
In my opinion, which is very unpopular amongst most Apple-users, they make great software and crappy hardware.
That is the reason I think they should switch from being hardware-centric to being software-centric, so that I can run their great software on my own choice of hardware.
As long as they do not, they will not gain me back as a paying customer.
But I do understand that, as long as they depend on hardware-sales for revenue, they can not make a non-proprietary version of OSX.
I they did, they'd probably sell a lot less hardware.
Doesn't change my opinion, though. =)
Exactly.
Apple does not compete directly with Microsoft and won't do until they release an OS that run on industry-standard x86-boxes instead of just Apple-proprietary x86-boxes.
As people who run Apple often tell me when I whine about OSX not running on standard hardware; Apple is a hardware-company who makes an OS so that their customers can have something to run on their boxes, and they put a lot of effort into making it not run on non-apple hardware.
Microsoft is a software-company that make an OS so that their customers have something to run MS-software on.
If Apple had been smart, they would have made a version of OSX that could run fine on last generation hardware, the one corporations are using right now, so that when the question of upgrading the corporate OS comes, it stands between upgrading the OS on every workstation to OSX or upgrading the hardware *and* upgrade to Vista on every single workstation.