You can simply avoid movies, television and other forms of packaged entertainment. Surely if it's truly excrement, it's not worth watching or listening to.
I haven't gone to a movie or watched TV in years. Can't say I miss it.
There are a lot of really cool things about it, but I have never seen such a vertical learning curve in my life. You have to understand the whole gestalt behind the system before you can write 'hello, world'.
So Linux on the hardware might indeed be a dream solution.
That's strange, I'm not a multi-million dollar company, but I could easily afford one of the dual-processor Macs. In fact, I'd be surprised if I don't get one by the end of the year (or when MacOS X is made available).
Anyone know when Adobe software (Photoshop/Illustrator) will be made available for the new platform?
(1) How much more performance would you get out of dual-500mhz processors than dual 450s? Enough to justify the $1,000 leap in price on the packaged machine (which admittedly has a lot of other cool goodies)?
(2) Why would you buy the cube when the dual processor G4 is only $200-odd more?
Apparently the driver supports acceleration only in 24-bit colour, and you need 32-bit colour to get rid of some tiresome analomies in Netscape (i.e. the very strange black and white icon display). Thus my desire for a better card.
Thanks for all the responses, folks! I'll look into both 3DFX and Matrox.
While we're sort of on this subject, could anyone suggest a good video card for Linux use?
I have a Compaq Pentium III/700 system whose video performance lags under Linux as compared to Windows. It's blazingly, even awesomely, fast under Windows but doesn't seem to be performing up to potential under Linux/Mandrake/Enlightenment.
The video setup that came with it is an Intel I810 or 815 chipset. My suspicion is that the driver wasn't that well optimized for Linux.
All I really want is screaming fast 1280x1024 @ 32 bit colour. I'm not fond of shooting up stuff, so I don't need awesome 3D performance or anything, just the ultimate possible regular graphics.
I don't use Windows at all on the machine, but would like to be able to use BeOS. I may eventually use the machine for video editing (MiniDV/FireWire) under BeOS or Linux, so anything that would make that work better would be good.
Was the reception to Bill's speech as tepid as he said? I'm much curious, since he was colourful, not objective.
If these languages are compiled, where does the "common language runtime" fit in? I thought runtime was for interpreted languages. Is it just another standard library type of thing?
One of the other things it could do struck me as interesting.
Let's say we have a.net enabled web browser, scheduling program and online reservations system. Or, to be specific, we have Microsoft Internet Explorer[tm], Microsoft Outlook[tm], and Microsoft Expedia[tm].
Tell Microsoft Outlook[tm] that you want to make an air reservation. It will bring up Microsoft Internet Explorer[tm] which will then send you to Microsoft Expedia[tm]. Make your reservation using Microsoft Expedia[tm], and the information will be automatically sent back to Microsoft Outlook[tm] using Microsoft XML[tm]. So if I make an air reservation to visit South Florida in October, the information will be automatically saved in my Outlook[tm] calendar. This is a bona fide convenience, albiet a small one. Now everyone in my office knows where I'm going, which they probably should. And I am reminded that I'm going, just in case I forget.
Although in theory this approach is based on Microsoft Open Technology[tm], in practice what happens is that people take the path of least resistance, continuing to use their Microsoft Windows[tm] computer, Microsoft Outlook[tm] and Outlook[tm] sends them automatically to Microsoft Expedia[tm]. So the end result is that the travel commission ends in Microsoft[tm]'s pocket.
In principle, then, this offers the promise of free software for all, since Microsoft[tm] makes its money by booking all my travel instead of selling me software. And I don't notice any change, since I've been paying the commissions to travel agents or rival services such as Travelocity. From the perspective of Microsoft[tm], they have just Helped The Consumer[tm].
So you could say this is neat, gee-wiz technology, or you could say it's a way to ensure that you never do business with a company other than Microsoft[tm]. Or you could say both, if it pleased you.
"But I don't LIKE Microsoft[tm] managing my life like this," you might respond. And there will probably be competition, by strong and stable companies such as Corel. They will copy the Microsoft.NET[tm] specifications for integration into their own products, but by some strange coincidence, they will never work as well as (or, more realistically, will work even worse than) the all-Microsoft(tm) solution.
So if you want to know why this is a "bet the company" initiative, and why Microsoft[tm] considers this so important, well, now you know.
I think a lot of people using Windows 95 don't want to go to that performance-sapping IE 4+ interface. I mean, yes, you can remove it, but who wants to take the trouble for just a few detail improvements?
(I've solved that problem by switching to Linux for most of my desktops, but my point's still valid).
By an interesting coincidence, I replaced a FoxPro/Telemagic system with a totally custom web based system using Linux and mySQL. The portion that replaced their Telemagic system took about 1.5 weeks for the initial beta and an additional month of refinement.
It would have cost at least $ 150k to have had an outside company do the exact same thing I did for about $40k (my salary over the whole development period).
I don't know why people complain so much about this. Music that I buy tends to be replayed a very large number of times over the life of the medium, making it an out and out bargain.
Compare this to the $ 25 novel - for the most part, read it once or twice and that's it.
The cost per play of purchased music makes it probably the cheapest form of entertainment there is. What's so bad about paying $ 16 for that?
It would greatly surprise me if the sound quality of most computers even begins to approach my Adcom CD player, power amplifier and Paradigm Reference 60 speakers.
Even if I hooked up my computer to my Adcom system, I'm pretty sure most sound cards are garbage. Until and unless that changes, the quality you can squeeze out of a MP3 file is not going to even come close to a CD.
Of course if I'm wrong, I'm happy to hear recommendations for exceptional sound cards that would work under Linux.
Of course I have to run my own DNS server, and a DNS vunerability is exactly what killed my site for that length of time.
I've subsequently upgraded my DNS (why on earth did they change the configuration file format so much, anyway?), but the scars from the experience still sting.
I should really clarify this just a bit - I'm not referring to the CERT advisories or things like that, but the "rootkits" that make exploitation of a compromised system virtually automatic.
A good point, yes. I do most Windows file manipulation in the MS-DOS prompt myself, since I like to see the commands and their output in the same window.
You're right - they had program groups, not the desktop.
But I'd wager most people use the desktop in a strikingly similar way to program groups, so I lumped them together. The idea is the same: You have to minimize your other programs and then you can click one of any number of icons to access the programs you want.
I always hated the GUI anyway, which is probably why I didn't distinguish properly between program groups and the desktop.
Slashdot Mirror
You can simply avoid movies, television and other forms of packaged entertainment. Surely if it's truly excrement, it's not worth watching or listening to.
I haven't gone to a movie or watched TV in years. Can't say I miss it.
D
----
I think it was about $ 700k.
I wonder what they're replacing it with. If I had one of those things, I'd really hate to see it go - they have panache.
D
----
If you don't mind the question ... how much do you think it will be on Linux?
D
----
I wish the AS/400 wasn't so hard to learn.
There are a lot of really cool things about it, but I have never seen such a vertical learning curve in my life. You have to understand the whole gestalt behind the system before you can write 'hello, world'.
So Linux on the hardware might indeed be a dream solution.
D
----
That's strange, I'm not a multi-million dollar company, but I could easily afford one of the dual-processor Macs. In fact, I'd be surprised if I don't get one by the end of the year (or when MacOS X is made available).
Anyone know when Adobe software (Photoshop/Illustrator) will be made available for the new platform?
D
----
(1) How much more performance would you get out of dual-500mhz processors than dual 450s? Enough to justify the $1,000 leap in price on the packaged machine (which admittedly has a lot of other cool goodies)?
(2) Why would you buy the cube when the dual processor G4 is only $200-odd more?
D
----
Apparently the driver supports acceleration only in 24-bit colour, and you need 32-bit colour to get rid of some tiresome analomies in Netscape (i.e. the very strange black and white icon display). Thus my desire for a better card.
Thanks for all the responses, folks! I'll look into both 3DFX and Matrox.
D
----
While we're sort of on this subject, could anyone suggest a good video card for Linux use?
I have a Compaq Pentium III/700 system whose video performance lags under Linux as compared to Windows. It's blazingly, even awesomely, fast under Windows but doesn't seem to be performing up to potential under Linux/Mandrake/Enlightenment.
The video setup that came with it is an Intel I810 or 815 chipset. My suspicion is that the driver wasn't that well optimized for Linux.
All I really want is screaming fast 1280x1024 @ 32 bit colour. I'm not fond of shooting up stuff, so I don't need awesome 3D performance or anything, just the ultimate possible regular graphics.
I don't use Windows at all on the machine, but would like to be able to use BeOS. I may eventually use the machine for video editing (MiniDV/FireWire) under BeOS or Linux, so anything that would make that work better would be good.
Any recommendations?
Many thanks.
D
----
That site doesn't seem to be working right now, but I still remember its mockup of a Kenworth SUV.
Trouble is, I think people would buy it. Seriously.
D
[Kenworth is a heavy truck manufacturer if you didn't know].
----
It's safer due to intelligent engineering, not bulk - and that gives you most of the SUV benefits without the huge size and lousy gas mileage.
Lots of fun to drive, too.
My main complaint about SUVs is that they're gut-wrenchingly ugly.
D
----
Yep.
:-).
I guess my rather ironic sense of humour didn't quite pass through correctly. That was exactly what I meant
D
----
Was the reception to Bill's speech as tepid as he said? I'm much curious, since he was colourful, not objective.
If these languages are compiled, where does the "common language runtime" fit in? I thought runtime was for interpreted languages. Is it just another standard library type of thing?
D
----
I can cheerfully recommend Budget - I've gotten consistently good service from them, nothing like that fellow says.
It helps to sign up for their frequent renter plan and get a card. You'll get much better treatment that way.
D
----
One of the other things it could do struck me as interesting.
.net enabled web browser, scheduling program and online reservations system. Or, to be specific, we have Microsoft Internet Explorer[tm], Microsoft Outlook[tm], and Microsoft Expedia[tm].
.NET[tm] specifications for integration into their own products, but by some strange coincidence, they will never work as well as (or, more realistically, will work even worse than) the all-Microsoft(tm) solution.
Let's say we have a
Tell Microsoft Outlook[tm] that you want to make an air reservation. It will bring up Microsoft Internet Explorer[tm] which will then send you to Microsoft Expedia[tm]. Make your reservation using Microsoft Expedia[tm], and the information will be automatically sent back to Microsoft Outlook[tm] using Microsoft XML[tm]. So if I make an air reservation to visit South Florida in October, the information will be automatically saved in my Outlook[tm] calendar. This is a bona fide convenience, albiet a small one. Now everyone in my office knows where I'm going, which they probably should. And I am reminded that I'm going, just in case I forget.
Although in theory this approach is based on Microsoft Open Technology[tm], in practice what happens is that people take the path of least resistance, continuing to use their Microsoft Windows[tm] computer, Microsoft Outlook[tm] and Outlook[tm] sends them automatically to Microsoft Expedia[tm]. So the end result is that the travel commission ends in Microsoft[tm]'s pocket.
In principle, then, this offers the promise of free software for all, since Microsoft[tm] makes its money by booking all my travel instead of selling me software. And I don't notice any change, since I've been paying the commissions to travel agents or rival services such as Travelocity. From the perspective of Microsoft[tm], they have just Helped The Consumer[tm].
So you could say this is neat, gee-wiz technology, or you could say it's a way to ensure that you never do business with a company other than Microsoft[tm]. Or you could say both, if it pleased you.
"But I don't LIKE Microsoft[tm] managing my life like this," you might respond. And there will probably be competition, by strong and stable companies such as Corel. They will copy the Microsoft
So if you want to know why this is a "bet the company" initiative, and why Microsoft[tm] considers this so important, well, now you know.
D
----
The whole development period, including refinements, that is - I've been working there about five months.
D
----
This sounds like a step backwards - didn't VB switch to being a compiled language just a version or two ago?
Do we really need yet another layer of MSOverhead(tm)?
D
----
I think a lot of people using Windows 95 don't want to go to that performance-sapping IE 4+ interface. I mean, yes, you can remove it, but who wants to take the trouble for just a few detail improvements?
(I've solved that problem by switching to Linux for most of my desktops, but my point's still valid).
D
----
By an interesting coincidence, I replaced a FoxPro/Telemagic system with a totally custom web based system using Linux and mySQL. The portion that replaced their Telemagic system took about 1.5 weeks for the initial beta and an additional month of refinement.
It would have cost at least $ 150k to have had an outside company do the exact same thing I did for about $40k (my salary over the whole development period).
D
----
Wow, if I'm going to go to all that trouble, I think I'll just buy the CD :-).
D
----
I don't know why people complain so much about this. Music that I buy tends to be replayed a very large number of times over the life of the medium, making it an out and out bargain.
Compare this to the $ 25 novel - for the most part, read it once or twice and that's it.
The cost per play of purchased music makes it probably the cheapest form of entertainment there is. What's so bad about paying $ 16 for that?
D
----
It would greatly surprise me if the sound quality of most computers even begins to approach my Adcom CD player, power amplifier and Paradigm Reference 60 speakers.
Even if I hooked up my computer to my Adcom system, I'm pretty sure most sound cards are garbage. Until and unless that changes, the quality you can squeeze out of a MP3 file is not going to even come close to a CD.
Of course if I'm wrong, I'm happy to hear recommendations for exceptional sound cards that would work under Linux.
D
----
Of course I have to run my own DNS server, and a DNS vunerability is exactly what killed my site for that length of time.
I've subsequently upgraded my DNS (why on earth did they change the configuration file format so much, anyway?), but the scars from the experience still sting.
D
----
I should really clarify this just a bit - I'm not referring to the CERT advisories or things like that, but the "rootkits" that make exploitation of a compromised system virtually automatic.
I see no "white hat" use for those at all.
D
----
A good point, yes. I do most Windows file manipulation in the MS-DOS prompt myself, since I like to see the commands and their output in the same window.
D
----
You're right - they had program groups, not the desktop.
But I'd wager most people use the desktop in a strikingly similar way to program groups, so I lumped them together. The idea is the same: You have to minimize your other programs and then you can click one of any number of icons to access the programs you want.
I always hated the GUI anyway, which is probably why I didn't distinguish properly between program groups and the desktop.
D
----