As long as you do not put "" around the query, I would not put it down to dishonesty.
I put quotes around the query, I don't put quotes, I've changed my user agent string... everything I do still comes up with the macs link first.
However if you type the same query on google without quotes then it does come up with some news post about macs being expensive about 7 rows down. With quotes however shows only windows links, unlike the bing search which doesn't seem to change its results at all.
I find that Bing performs better when searching for things like very unusual API documentation and code examples. When you search for things that are very unusual, Google will sometimes go out of it's way to suggest alternatives, and sometimes even just show you the hits for what it thinks you want, and even drop the "did you really want to search for this?" link.
After reading the article it seems that's the direction that Bing will soon be taking too..
Bing, he said, is looking to solve the challenge of deciphering user intent. This means finding what users are searching for even though the consumers' query words don't match their idea of what they want to find.
I simply don't want to upgrade my graphics card every year just to play the latest and greatest games.
Why would you say this and expect anyone to believe you when the story is about all games being targeted towards lower powered consoles to the point that it's futile to upgrade your PC?
No one has mentioned linux until you showed up. Why is it that the anti-linux crowd shows up the minute anyone mentions openGL or cross platform? I suggest you go back and re-read the GPs post which is directed at wii/ps3/xbox360.
Even so, your post makes no sense. You list everyone being on Windows and OSX yet fail to realise that OSX uses openGL. What on earth was your point with this off-topic rant?
So let me get this straight. ATI cards are still crap on linux (like they've always been) yet somehow the open source 3D support is coming soon.
So I could buy an Nvidia card which has great proprietary driver support for linux games or switch to the open source nouveau driver which has 3D too, or I could buy an ATI card which won't work with anything.. ummm.. this is a difficult decision...
Because in the US they'd get a slap on the wrist, perhaps some kind of fine. In China their business would be destroyed, the government would threaten their business partners, jail their workers, etc.
The score system is totally stupid. The only way you can get 16 points is if the game is based in the UK.
Under that model, those seeking relief must score at least 16 points out of a possible 31 in a ‘culturally British’ test. There are four criteria under which studios can qualify that are as follows: a) Cultural Content (16 pts) – Determining whether the film’s narrative is set in the UK, whether its lead characters are British, whether the film is centred on British subject matter, and if the dialogue is recorded “in the English language”. b) Cultural Contribution (4 pts) – Determining whether the film represents “a diverse British culture, British heritage or British creativity”. c) Cultural Hubs (3 pts) – Determining whether the film is produced in the UK studios. d) Cultural Practitioners (8 pts) – Determining whether the cast, crew and/or producers come from the EEA (European Economic Area), with points based on each role.
The design team made a decision, and they've said they'll take on board any reasonable criticisms but most of what's going on is cry babies with their, "Listen to me, I want it this way, just because,
That's total bullshit. What's really happening is Mark is saying "I want it on the left, just because".
READ IT. I count more then 10 reasonable reasons for keeping the buttons on the right. Now read Mark's reasons for changing it. There are none! All he says is he is planning something for that space. What!?!
They say it was a decision from the design team however, I suspect the decision to change the window controls has to do with the new mac guy that just joined canonical. The timing is just too convenient.
Either way it's a foot meet bullet situation. I very much suspect a lot of people to move distro over this. Yes, I know you can type in a command to fix this however the point of Ubuntu was that you could install it and go. You didn't have to dick around with it and this decision is going to force people to spend time configuring their system unless they add some option at install time.
It's like Snow Leopard changing the controls on the right. How they expected to do this without getting criticised heavily for it is absurd. Not only that but Mark's Comments towards the end of this bug report posted in a previous slashdot story have really opened my eyes as to what a dick he really is when talking to his users.
There's lots of reasons to keep the close buttons on the right by default and yet Mark can't come up with one reason to move them, just a lot of nonsense about "his plans" which he doesn't want to share.
I don't see a problem with rendering HTML in a multi threaded way. You could do it simply by the top level tags. For example, a page I am current viewing has one div with 6 divs inside it. So render the first div and once it is done split the next 6 divs up into threads.
Granted its more difficult them I am describing however still very possible.
You could (from a user perspective) increase the illusion of page load times by rendering the stuff that the browser determines is on every page. For example, slashdot pages have the same structure on almost every page. I can't see a reason why a browser (after a few page views) couldn't evaluate which parts of a site aren't dynamic and render those while the real page actually loads up. With HTML5 you could extend this further by just changing the data in certain tags.
You might have problems with pages which are completely different but it's worth giving it a try and see the results of using a browser that can do this.
An OS has lots of programs running in the background. Programs for dealing with network traffic, file deleteing/creating/copying, showing the GUI, running the clock app, dealing with your graphics card, plugged in USB devices etc. A redesigned OS would have to deal with more then 5-10 "applications".
I've yet to find a Linux distribution that supports all releases for eternity; perhaps you are aware of one?
Some linux distributions just continuously update their packages without any specific releases like Ubuntu does. For example gentoo and arch (?), etc.
It's true that Linux distributions don't have support for as long as windows does however I get the feeling the these huge distribution upgrades such as XP -> Windows 7 cost IT departments more time then just staying up to date with the latest version of whatever Linux distribution you're using.
Think about it. If you're continuously doing updates to your systems it's business as usual. If you have to roll out the latest windows to over 2000 desktops every 10 years that's going to cost you a lot of downtime and productivity loss.
Why? Well first it's a bigger change then continuous improvements. Maybe on Linux some menu that the user has gotten used to has changed but it's not a big deal because it's just a small change. Going from one version of windows to another is a massive change sometimes, for example xp to vista or win 7. Users don't like huge changes they balk at them and throw their hands in the air yelling that they can't work any more.
Another reason is that if you got to convert 2000 desktops to the latest OS, a lot of the business apps are probably going to have problems. Constant rolling updates have the some problem however you don't get 10+ apps not working all at the same time.
At least I can download it and record it to a CD so I can use the CD if I need it in the future.
You're going around in circles. I already addressed this point. You can do this on linux as well as OSX.
However that's not what you said, is it?
I would have already installed both.NET and DirectX from a CD I made some time ago
You were comparing downloading the packages and putting them on a CD with Linux to the CD already magically being burned on windows.
Your poor comparisons like this, your general lack of linux knowledge and your unwillingness to accept facts when people correct you just shows how invalid the points you're making are.
And while you are trying to find out exactly which 5 libs at 2 to 5 Meg each are needed, I would have already installed both.NET and DirectX from a CD I made some time ago
See, this is what I was talking about in the first place. You hand wave over issues for your favourite OS and draw an unfair conclusion.
.NET and similar frameworks on Windows are few enough that I could download them and write them to a CD before going to the PC without connection.
There's nothing stopping you from doing the same with Linux either. Most programs don't have a huge list of dependencies.
I can't download and install every single lib on Linux, also, I won't know that lib12 needs lib13 until I install it.
You don't need to install every package on linux. Also there is nothing stopping you from going to some place like http://packages.ubuntu.com/ and finding out which packages you need to download.
If it's not in the main repo you can just double click on the file and look at the list there.
If Linux only had 50 optional libs, I could download them all and write them to a CD so I could use them.
If linux only had 50 optional libs it would be as bad as the train wreak that windows is in. Downloading DirectX (104.0 MB) and.NET (another 235 MB according to the full install on the bottom of this page) just to run your program. Are you kidding me?!
It is MUCH better to just download the 5 dependency libs at 2 to 5 Meg each all of which track updates through one update manager.
Either way while you're still waiting for your 300 Megs of bloat to finish downloading I would have already downloaded the what I needed, burned it to the disk and be finished.
Slashdot Mirror
Firstly, it was poetmatt's post, not mine. Secondly you failed to address any of the points I made in MY post.
But thanks for bouncing back on topic, at least you're not a complete troll.
Sorry but I don't believe it. This is has been parroted for years now ever since ATI announced they were going to work on open sourcing their drivers.
All I ever hear from these discussions are "just wait", "it's coming", "due x number of months".
I put quotes around the query, I don't put quotes, I've changed my user agent string... everything I do still comes up with the macs link first.
However if you type the same query on google without quotes then it does come up with some news post about macs being expensive about 7 rows down. With quotes however shows only windows links, unlike the bing search which doesn't seem to change its results at all.
I tried a few different user agent strings and it doesn't make a difference here. I get the same results every time (with macs being at the top).
After reading the article it seems that's the direction that Bing will soon be taking too..
Why would you say this and expect anyone to believe you when the story is about all games being targeted towards lower powered consoles to the point that it's futile to upgrade your PC?
No one has mentioned linux until you showed up. Why is it that the anti-linux crowd shows up the minute anyone mentions openGL or cross platform? I suggest you go back and re-read the GPs post which is directed at wii/ps3/xbox360.
Even so, your post makes no sense. You list everyone being on Windows and OSX yet fail to realise that OSX uses openGL. What on earth was your point with this off-topic rant?
So let me get this straight. ATI cards are still crap on linux (like they've always been) yet somehow the open source 3D support is coming soon.
So I could buy an Nvidia card which has great proprietary driver support for linux games or switch to the open source nouveau driver which has 3D too, or I could buy an ATI card which won't work with anything.. ummm.. this is a difficult decision...
Because in the US they'd get a slap on the wrist, perhaps some kind of fine. In China their business would be destroyed, the government would threaten their business partners, jail their workers, etc.
The score system is totally stupid. The only way you can get 16 points is if the game is based in the UK.
That's total bullshit. What's really happening is Mark is saying "I want it on the left, just because".
READ IT. I count more then 10 reasonable reasons for keeping the buttons on the right. Now read Mark's reasons for changing it. There are none! All he says is he is planning something for that space. What!?!
They say it was a decision from the design team however, I suspect the decision to change the window controls has to do with the new mac guy that just joined canonical. The timing is just too convenient.
Either way it's a foot meet bullet situation. I very much suspect a lot of people to move distro over this. Yes, I know you can type in a command to fix this however the point of Ubuntu was that you could install it and go. You didn't have to dick around with it and this decision is going to force people to spend time configuring their system unless they add some option at install time.
It's like Snow Leopard changing the controls on the right. How they expected to do this without getting criticised heavily for it is absurd. Not only that but Mark's Comments towards the end of this bug report posted in a previous slashdot story have really opened my eyes as to what a dick he really is when talking to his users.
There's lots of reasons to keep the close buttons on the right by default and yet Mark can't come up with one reason to move them, just a lot of nonsense about "his plans" which he doesn't want to share.
Does this include scams like PC world's "IT Repair" or "Tune up" service's which costs 15 GBP a month and is basically a virus scan?
This is about the UK not the US so no.
Sounds like someone woke up too early when commenting. Perhaps try getting up later and reading the summary..
All the paper work is digitally scanned in anyway. It makes no damn difference.
Try going to a different country without one and see how it "infringes" your right to move about.
I don't see a problem with rendering HTML in a multi threaded way. You could do it simply by the top level tags. For example, a page I am current viewing has one div with 6 divs inside it. So render the first div and once it is done split the next 6 divs up into threads.
Granted its more difficult them I am describing however still very possible.
You could (from a user perspective) increase the illusion of page load times by rendering the stuff that the browser determines is on every page. For example, slashdot pages have the same structure on almost every page. I can't see a reason why a browser (after a few page views) couldn't evaluate which parts of a site aren't dynamic and render those while the real page actually loads up. With HTML5 you could extend this further by just changing the data in certain tags.
You might have problems with pages which are completely different but it's worth giving it a try and see the results of using a browser that can do this.
An OS has lots of programs running in the background. Programs for dealing with network traffic, file deleteing/creating/copying, showing the GUI, running the clock app, dealing with your graphics card, plugged in USB devices etc. A redesigned OS would have to deal with more then 5-10 "applications".
It's just a joke. The same reason they have a gnu holding a blanket sucking his thumb every time there is a free software story.
Some linux distributions just continuously update their packages without any specific releases like Ubuntu does. For example gentoo and arch (?), etc.
It's true that Linux distributions don't have support for as long as windows does however I get the feeling the these huge distribution upgrades such as XP -> Windows 7 cost IT departments more time then just staying up to date with the latest version of whatever Linux distribution you're using.
Think about it. If you're continuously doing updates to your systems it's business as usual. If you have to roll out the latest windows to over 2000 desktops every 10 years that's going to cost you a lot of downtime and productivity loss.
Why? Well first it's a bigger change then continuous improvements. Maybe on Linux some menu that the user has gotten used to has changed but it's not a big deal because it's just a small change. Going from one version of windows to another is a massive change sometimes, for example xp to vista or win 7. Users don't like huge changes they balk at them and throw their hands in the air yelling that they can't work any more.
Another reason is that if you got to convert 2000 desktops to the latest OS, a lot of the business apps are probably going to have problems. Constant rolling updates have the some problem however you don't get 10+ apps not working all at the same time.
You're going around in circles. I already addressed this point. You can do this on linux as well as OSX.
However that's not what you said, is it?
You were comparing downloading the packages and putting them on a CD with Linux to the CD already magically being burned on windows.
Your poor comparisons like this, your general lack of linux knowledge and your unwillingness to accept facts when people correct you just shows how invalid the points you're making are.
See, this is what I was talking about in the first place. You hand wave over issues for your favourite OS and draw an unfair conclusion.
There's nothing stopping you from doing the same with Linux either. Most programs don't have a huge list of dependencies.
You don't need to install every package on linux. Also there is nothing stopping you from going to some place like http://packages.ubuntu.com/ and finding out which packages you need to download.
If it's not in the main repo you can just double click on the file and look at the list there.
If linux only had 50 optional libs it would be as bad as the train wreak that windows is in. Downloading DirectX (104.0 MB) and .NET (another 235 MB according to the full install on the bottom of this page) just to run your program. Are you kidding me?!
It is MUCH better to just download the 5 dependency libs at 2 to 5 Meg each all of which track updates through one update manager.
Either way while you're still waiting for your 300 Megs of bloat to finish downloading I would have already downloaded the what I needed, burned it to the disk and be finished.