Since Edge comes from the same company that makes the OS used to run those benchmarks, the fact the it did not win in all, or even most of, instances is a failure.
Um, No...
I'm sure that there is a trade-off where optimizing for specific content, which can have an effect on the loading time of other content. So, it would make sense for some browsers to have an edge depending on the test format.
Also, the benchmark includes checking for support for specific formats and functions, some more esoteric than others. For example, the HTML5 test includes a test for Ogg Theora. Mozilla and Opera were proponents of this format and support it, but it appears that it is being left in the dust for H.264 and VP9/10. Edge's lack of support for this format would hurt it in this benchmark, but in reality it's a moot point as very few web sites use this format.
"Edge gets 402 points on the HTML5Test.com test compared with 526 for Chrome and 467 for Firefox out of a possible 555 points. A lot of this is for code that very few sites use, such as Ogg Theora video, but some useful capabilities like Web notifications and WebRTC support for mic and camera access are still missing."
You save when buying a console, lose money over time when buying 100's of games.
That's fine for people who live alone, not quite so fine for a parent with multiple gamers in the house. Say you see one game for a console and another game for a PC. The console game allows up to four players on a single TV, while the PC game requires you to buy a separate copy of the game for each player and run each copy on a separate PC. Which game do you buy? Also, time is money, and a lot of people don't want to waste time troubleshooting GPU driver issues, reconfiguring buttons whenever a USB gamepad is plugged in or out, and the like.
I've summed up more of the Peasants' talking points in this article, and I'd be interested to see what I left out.
I agree with the points that the "value" of PCs purely as a gaming platform is relatively low in comparison to the value of a console. From purely this perspective, the PC is more of a quality gaming experience rather than a value one. Although, there is an argument that could be made that the PC has a vibrant modding community which extends the values of games, such as Skyrim, much beyond their normal lifetime. This is one area where the PC adds value that the console lacks. Plus, PC games drop in price much quicker than console games do.
However, everything in your article smacks of cherry picking. For example, It completely ignores the valid argument that a PC/laptop can and would be used for much more than gaming (i.e. work, homework), GPU driver issues really are a thing of the past (both ATI and AMD have push notification for new drivers), and that the vast majority of games now come with Xbox controller support which is easily added to a PC (No need for fiddling with controller settings). It also ignores the fact that you can get a PC comparable to the latest game consoles for under $1000. Yes, you can spend a ton of money on a nice GPU, but even the average GPUs today (i.e. R9 270) are more powerful than the latest consoles.
I'm not arguing that any particular product is right for a family on a budget. It's up to each family to decide their priorities. But, if I was on a tight budget and I wanted the best value, I would buy something that does more than just gaming.
Actually the typical advice given to bikers is to ride thinking that everyone around you is actively trying to kill you. It works because most people grossly underestimate how others can be *incompetent* but have much less difficulties in thinking about how others could be *malicious*. This is helpful in getting enough caution out of them.
And helmets are only rated to protect against low impact forces. Most people think that helmets off much more protection than they actually do. Safe Cycling skills are much more important.
Clearly the automated barcode reader tool which should have grabbed boxes of dead rather than live anthrax has been co-opted by Skynet. Not as much fun as nuking cities, but leads to the same mountains of skeletons in the end.
I wonder if they are using the same system as Amazon which kept shipping me size 11.5 shoes when I specifically ordered 10.5 shoes and which lists a slightly longer pipe for 3x the cost (Someone typed $92 when it clearly should be $42) of the shorter pipe ($38). The point is that most automated systems are only as good as the data input by the user.
Of course, there is always the chance that whatever is being used to kill the anthrax is malfunctioning.
Most people do. Encyclopaedia Britannica is no longer published in physical form, and does anyone much use the online version?
Despite the possibility of abuse, Wikipedia was a better encyclopaedia than the best physical encyclopaedia. It's vast coverage and constant editing as new things come to light, outweighs it's flaws.
Wikipedia is The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy of today (the fictional electronic book in the same titled SciFi novel). It can be inaccurate but is usually good enough...
Well, think of this example: you run a nice little restaurant in town. Along comes Yelp and Google reviews, so people can post reviews of your restaurant online. Some customers are just assholes, and you happen to get one who is completely unreasonable, says racist stuff to one of your staff, whatever. Anyway they go away angry and write a nasty and completely false review of your restaurant on Yelp.
One way you can deal with that is to make sure you have lots of positive reviews to drown out the nasty ones. And you get lots of positive reviews by doing positive things, like serving great food and having great service, not by hiring a bunch of people who have never been to your restaurant to write good reviews.
But you raise a good point.
But this misunderstands how people are motivated. Anger is a much more powerful motivator than being happy with something. In the example above, it would maybe take 1000 very happy people to get enough good reviews (i.e. maybe 1% will actually post a review) to drown out a few unhappy customers.
I'm not advocating for fake reviews. All I'm saying is that there has to be a way to counterbalance human nature to give a somewhat fair and accurate picture. Today, organizations and individuals use reputation management for that function.
Cisco Engineers massively prefer Macs over PCs to the point that those that use anything other than Macs are rare. By improving their products on Macs, they are helping their employees even before any clients are considered.
I have no idea where you got this idea from. The vast majority of Cisco engineers that I know use Windows PCs for the simple reason that there is a much wider array of network analysis, management, and utilities for Windows. Not to mention drivers. Most of us are more interested in designing, configuring, and troubleshooting our networks and don't have time to mess around with UNIX drivers, etc. just to get a network tool to work.
I want something that allows me to watch movies and/or episode-based content AS *I* want.
Their offerings of content have continued to get slimmer in the recent couple of years. And I'm finding myself using them less and less.
If Netflix stops delivering that content altogether, I stop subscribing.
And, if we start seeing ADS attached to the content, I'm fucking outta there so fast the wind of my passing will bowl you over.
That's precisely why I dropped Netflix 3 to 4 years ago. Around 2011 they had a falling out with movie studios. They we no longer offering many new movies for streaming and the only way you could get them was via DVD rental. Also, Redbox became popular around that time and filled that niche for me. Between that and Amazon streaming, I'm all set. And now HBO has a streaming service. Maybe that's one the reasons why Netflix is backing off of movies.
The only thing now keeping me on cable is sports. I wish that the NFL would hurry up and offer a streaming option. I'm all set for Hockey with NHL Gamecenter Live, though its annoying that it doesn't include the Stanley Cup Playoffs in the US (still need cable or over the air for that).
Windows 95 copied system 7, and the Start Menu copied a system 7 extension called the Hierarchial menu which allowed you to put folders of apps, or just normal directory folders under the apple menu and navigate through them.
Lets just ignore the fact that much of this was in development at Xerox Parc. All you need to do is look at the design elements (including hierarchical menus) from that time and you see the same in Windows and Mac OS. Both companies took the base model and innovated in their own ways. I'm also pretty sure that as their products evolved each influenced the other and both have borrowed from other 3rd party products...
It's like harping that Jeep has a blind spot warning system in their cars when Volvo had it first... Get over it, everyone borrows from everyone else and the only way to stay on top is to continue innovating. It's one of the reasons why Microsoft took a chance on the Metro UI. Yes, people hated it. But not because it's bad, but because Microsoft made it difficult for non-touch users to get to the desktop. The jury is still out whether it will succeed or not.
Wow, I can't believe that I found this piece of nostalgia about Windows 95 comparing it to Mac OS 7. It also includes an article on ID's Doom.... https://news.google.com/newspa...
Do we really want Google or Mozilla, or any other browser determining what content we can see or not see in a browser? I understand the security problems with Flash and I am not a fan of Flash, but everybody gets upset if an ISP blocks content, so why is it okay for a browser to do so? What next, will they block? This seems like an awfully big slippery slope and people are just accepting it.
Not really the same situation, I think a browser is perfectly entitled to say what third party plug-in/add-on/extension APIs it will allow, how they'll run and so on. Just like Firefox just decided to change their extension API, now whether it's a good idea is a different story but they're certainly entitled to do so. Would you be opposed to IE dropping support for ActiveX plug-ins too? I'm here assuming that there's some technical difference in flash between ads and video players, not that Google is actually sitting there saying that's an ad and that is not.
But you're saying that because you don't like Flash or Ads. Also, there is a difference in dropping or retiring something, like Active-X, and modifying the functionality of a plug-in that is used to display content created by a third party application. For example, most people would be upset if Google decided to display all JPGs (i.e. the photo of your dog) with the google logo on top of them. This isn't that much different.
That being said, as long as Adobe can offer a plugin with full functionality and it can be added to Chrome then I'm okay with this. As far as I know, the default flash plugin for Google is called Pepper and is probably written and supported by Google, which is why they can do this. According to the site below, you can enable the Adobe plugin which would presumably bypass any default flash behavior changes that Google makes to Chrome.
These guys weren't armed with anything more than good training, and the mental preparedness to take action in a crisis, nevermind the guts to do so at considerable personal risk.
The average person will most likely freeze in a crisis, just out of sheer human nature. It takes a lot of training to overcome that, and to build up the instinct to act (nevermind in a beneficial manner), which in a combat situation is often the difference between life and death.
It's fun when people make assumptions based on their own biases... The latest update from CNN mentions that a civilian was also involved in subduing the shooter. "The three men -- a member of the Air Force, an inactive National Guard member and a civilian -- responded quickly, possibly preventing a deadly attack on the high-speed Thalys train." So, what were you saying about the average person again?
Everyone has fight or flight instincts and each situation is different. I would expect armed forces personnel to be more likely to respond quickly. That being said, it doesn't negate the fact that there are civilians who keep their heads in a crisis and who would respond.
I like lots of games, but I am not sure they fit into a genre. I like games with a robust offline experience, and I don't like to play online at all, especially against people who have way too many hours and way too many dollars to throw at mods so you can't enjoy your experience at all. I like Red Dead Redemption, Grand Theft Auto, Final Fantasy, Skyrim, Lego Movie Adaptations and Gran Turismo. Don't care for sports games or World of Warcraft or online FPS.
My tastes are similar but I do like FPS games... Oblivion, Skyrim, Far Cry, Uncharted, Fallout, Dark Souls, Wolfenstein, Bioshock
I don't like MMO games simply because I don't have the time to put into grinding to make it worth it. And don't get me started about today's online FPS games. It used to be that they were balanced enough that a casual player could survive long enough to at least explore the map a bit before getting killed. Most of them now seem to be designed to kill off fresh meat as soon as they appear.
Most chess players have no interest in checkers, poker, or go.
I'm not sure that's true. I've never met a chess play who couldn't play checkers. Chess players often switch to poker, and there are even chess + poker tournaments.
Funny, I play chess, not at a tournament level but for fun, and I sometimes like playing checkers and love playing poker. Of course, playing poker, for me, isn't about playing cards it's about having fun with my friends. As for Go, the only reason why a lot of people don't play Go is because it isn't all that popular, at least in the US and Canada. I would think that a lot of Chess players would also enjoy Go because it does require strategy.
You must work for the same company I do. We have a huge group known as Engineering that does not fall under IT that absolutely does need to use such tools. Typical IT arrogance.
No, it's not IT arrogance, it's a generalization... Generalizations by their nature have exceptions to the rule.
The vast majority of users in a company that are not in IT do not need Wireshark or network analysis tools. However, there are companies that produce, engineer, and/or support electronics, software, etc. where these tools might come in handy to verify that the product is working correctly. Obviously, those users would be an exception to the rule.
With the move towards corporate web based applications, there is even less software that needs to be installed than in the past.
Judging by the information in the article, it sounds like Amazon is High School all over again. People sniping at each other to increase their status, the politically connected get protected, cliques banding together for survival, etc.. The only difference is the lack of life outside of the environment. Sounds like hell to me....
I honestly can't remember the last time I actually went to a store to do research for an online purchase. It just doesn't happen. If I actually take the time and go to a store and they have what I need/want it is very unlikely that I'll go back home and order whatever it was to save a few bucks and spend even more time waiting for it to be delivered. I don't doubt that there are people who do that but judging by the number of people living paycheck to paycheck I doubt they are in the majority.
I agree about the research comment. I've never gone to a store for product research except for vehicles like cars, boats, etc..
There are three situations where I go to a store to buy anything but groceries:
1. When I need something right away and overnight shipping is more than 3% of the item cost. Typically in this situation, the item wouldn't get to me on time if I ordered online with 2 day shipping. I would have to pay through the nose for next day. It's usually when I'm about to go on vacation and I forgot to buy something.
2. Clothes. Yes, most online clothing stores have free return policies but its more inconvenient than running down to the nearest clothing store. Shoes and sneakers are the hardest to buy as, it seems, not one shoe manufacturer uses the same sizing chart. Kohls actually does a good job here. I can try on stuff in store, scan the bar-code with their mobile app, and order through their online store. Usually I only do this if they don't have the size/style I want in the store. That being said, I have been buying dress shirts online.
3. Same Price. If the store has the item at a similar or same price as I can find online I will buy from the store. At that point it's more convenient for me to drive to the local store and pick it up or grab it while I am already there for something else.
Not a bad idea. Each passenger gets a free 200lb total encumberance allotment, whether that's human weight or luggage weight..
Except that this would open up a can of worms like sexism, etc.. Why should an average guy pay more for a plane flight with the same weight of luggage as an average woman? Like it or not, men tend to be heavier, even if they are at their ideal weight.
Of course, they could go with some sort of standard for height, weigh, sex, etc. and you only pay for the amount that you are over your ideal weight. But this, again, gets into privacy concerns because it would be recorded somewhere.
In other words, implementing a standard weight of passenger + carry-on just wouldn't work.
The United States of America will still exist in 30-40 years?
Did you perhaps mean instead the New Confederate States of America? The Republic of Texas? The Free Republic of Idaho? Mexarkana? Absaroka? The Jefferson Freehold? New Deseret? The Republic of Sequoyah?
Nope... Canada... Canada will be the richest country in the world due to it's fresh water reserves and will buy up the US for pennies on the Loonie... (grin)
If you want an array of seismic sensors, build one. If you want an inter-continental data network, build that. Don't try to hack the one to do the job of the other.
Exactly. The complication and the added failure modes would go up drastically if sensors were incorporated into communications lines. What happens if all of the sensors fail? Do you tear up the communications lines just to fix them?
What you do is build a separate system, build relationships with the communications companies, and make a business deal to have it laid at the same time as undersea cables. I agree that there are economic benefits to sharing the same deployment resources, but they should be separate infrastructures.
Slashdot Mirror
Since Edge comes from the same company that makes the OS used to run those benchmarks, the fact the it did not win in all, or even most of, instances is a failure.
Um, No...
I'm sure that there is a trade-off where optimizing for specific content, which can have an effect on the loading time of other content. So, it would make sense for some browsers to have an edge depending on the test format.
Also, the benchmark includes checking for support for specific formats and functions, some more esoteric than others. For example, the HTML5 test includes a test for Ogg Theora. Mozilla and Opera were proponents of this format and support it, but it appears that it is being left in the dust for H.264 and VP9/10. Edge's lack of support for this format would hurt it in this benchmark, but in reality it's a moot point as very few web sites use this format.
"Edge gets 402 points on the HTML5Test.com test compared with 526 for Chrome and 467 for Firefox out of a possible 555 points. A lot of this is for code that very few sites use, such as Ogg Theora video, but some useful capabilities like Web notifications and WebRTC support for mic and camera access are still missing."
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/...
Take all benchmarks with a grain of salt...
I do woodworking as a hobby.
I recently fixed a cabinet for a family member. A glue joint had come loose, not a big deal.
My cabinets are missing half the doors and two of the drawers are busted. I just never seem to get around to fixing it...
No different than people who work in IT, programming, etc and don't backup their systems....
You save when buying a console, lose money over time when buying 100's of games.
That's fine for people who live alone, not quite so fine for a parent with multiple gamers in the house. Say you see one game for a console and another game for a PC. The console game allows up to four players on a single TV, while the PC game requires you to buy a separate copy of the game for each player and run each copy on a separate PC. Which game do you buy? Also, time is money, and a lot of people don't want to waste time troubleshooting GPU driver issues, reconfiguring buttons whenever a USB gamepad is plugged in or out, and the like.
I've summed up more of the Peasants' talking points in this article, and I'd be interested to see what I left out.
I agree with the points that the "value" of PCs purely as a gaming platform is relatively low in comparison to the value of a console. From purely this perspective, the PC is more of a quality gaming experience rather than a value one. Although, there is an argument that could be made that the PC has a vibrant modding community which extends the values of games, such as Skyrim, much beyond their normal lifetime. This is one area where the PC adds value that the console lacks. Plus, PC games drop in price much quicker than console games do.
However, everything in your article smacks of cherry picking. For example, It completely ignores the valid argument that a PC/laptop can and would be used for much more than gaming (i.e. work, homework), GPU driver issues really are a thing of the past (both ATI and AMD have push notification for new drivers), and that the vast majority of games now come with Xbox controller support which is easily added to a PC (No need for fiddling with controller settings). It also ignores the fact that you can get a PC comparable to the latest game consoles for under $1000. Yes, you can spend a ton of money on a nice GPU, but even the average GPUs today (i.e. R9 270) are more powerful than the latest consoles.
I'm not arguing that any particular product is right for a family on a budget. It's up to each family to decide their priorities. But, if I was on a tight budget and I wanted the best value, I would buy something that does more than just gaming.
Actually the typical advice given to bikers is to ride thinking that everyone around you is actively trying to kill you. It works because most people grossly underestimate how others can be *incompetent* but have much less difficulties in thinking about how others could be *malicious*. This is helpful in getting enough caution out of them.
And helmets are only rated to protect against low impact forces. Most people think that helmets off much more protection than they actually do. Safe Cycling skills are much more important.
http://bicyclesafe.com/helmets...
Wait... They've discovered Cacodemons in the Arctic...
http://doom.wikia.com/wiki/Cat...
From the post I replied to: "Compiz, beryl, metro are mistakes, right? Wrong"
So which distro of Win 8 do you recommend?
Windows 10, with all of the tracking settings turned off... ;-)
Clearly the automated barcode reader tool which should have grabbed boxes of dead rather than live anthrax has been co-opted by Skynet. Not as much fun as nuking cities, but leads to the same mountains of skeletons in the end.
I wonder if they are using the same system as Amazon which kept shipping me size 11.5 shoes when I specifically ordered 10.5 shoes and which lists a slightly longer pipe for 3x the cost (Someone typed $92 when it clearly should be $42) of the shorter pipe ($38). The point is that most automated systems are only as good as the data input by the user.
Of course, there is always the chance that whatever is being used to kill the anthrax is malfunctioning.
Most people do. Encyclopaedia Britannica is no longer published in physical form, and does anyone much use the online version?
Despite the possibility of abuse, Wikipedia was a better encyclopaedia than the best physical encyclopaedia. It's vast coverage and constant editing as new things come to light, outweighs it's flaws.
Wikipedia is The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy of today (the fictional electronic book in the same titled SciFi novel). It can be inaccurate but is usually good enough...
One way you can deal with that is to make sure you have lots of positive reviews to drown out the nasty ones. And you get lots of positive reviews by doing positive things, like serving great food and having great service, not by hiring a bunch of people who have never been to your restaurant to write good reviews.
But you raise a good point.
But this misunderstands how people are motivated. Anger is a much more powerful motivator than being happy with something. In the example above, it would maybe take 1000 very happy people to get enough good reviews (i.e. maybe 1% will actually post a review) to drown out a few unhappy customers.
I'm not advocating for fake reviews. All I'm saying is that there has to be a way to counterbalance human nature to give a somewhat fair and accurate picture. Today, organizations and individuals use reputation management for that function.
Cisco Engineers massively prefer Macs over PCs to the point that those that use anything other than Macs are rare. By improving their products on Macs, they are helping their employees even before any clients are considered.
I have no idea where you got this idea from. The vast majority of Cisco engineers that I know use Windows PCs for the simple reason that there is a much wider array of network analysis, management, and utilities for Windows. Not to mention drivers. Most of us are more interested in designing, configuring, and troubleshooting our networks and don't have time to mess around with UNIX drivers, etc. just to get a network tool to work.
I want something that allows me to watch movies and/or episode-based content AS *I* want.
Their offerings of content have continued to get slimmer in the recent couple of years. And I'm finding myself using them less and less.
If Netflix stops delivering that content altogether, I stop subscribing.
And, if we start seeing ADS attached to the content, I'm fucking outta there so fast the wind of my passing will bowl you over.
That's precisely why I dropped Netflix 3 to 4 years ago. Around 2011 they had a falling out with movie studios. They we no longer offering many new movies for streaming and the only way you could get them was via DVD rental. Also, Redbox became popular around that time and filled that niche for me. Between that and Amazon streaming, I'm all set. And now HBO has a streaming service. Maybe that's one the reasons why Netflix is backing off of movies.
The only thing now keeping me on cable is sports. I wish that the NFL would hurry up and offer a streaming option. I'm all set for Hockey with NHL Gamecenter Live, though its annoying that it doesn't include the Stanley Cup Playoffs in the US (still need cable or over the air for that).
Windows 95 copied system 7, and the Start Menu copied a system 7 extension called the Hierarchial menu which allowed you to put folders of apps, or just normal directory folders under the apple menu and navigate through them.
Lets just ignore the fact that much of this was in development at Xerox Parc. All you need to do is look at the design elements (including hierarchical menus) from that time and you see the same in Windows and Mac OS. Both companies took the base model and innovated in their own ways. I'm also pretty sure that as their products evolved each influenced the other and both have borrowed from other 3rd party products...
It's like harping that Jeep has a blind spot warning system in their cars when Volvo had it first... Get over it, everyone borrows from everyone else and the only way to stay on top is to continue innovating. It's one of the reasons why Microsoft took a chance on the Metro UI. Yes, people hated it. But not because it's bad, but because Microsoft made it difficult for non-touch users to get to the desktop. The jury is still out whether it will succeed or not.
Wow, I can't believe that I found this piece of nostalgia about Windows 95 comparing it to Mac OS 7. It also includes an article on ID's Doom....
https://news.google.com/newspa...
Welcome to the Hotel Flash-it-for-ya... Such a lovely place... Such a lovely place...
Do we really want Google or Mozilla, or any other browser determining what content we can see or not see in a browser? I understand the security problems with Flash and I am not a fan of Flash, but everybody gets upset if an ISP blocks content, so why is it okay for a browser to do so? What next, will they block? This seems like an awfully big slippery slope and people are just accepting it.
Not really the same situation, I think a browser is perfectly entitled to say what third party plug-in/add-on/extension APIs it will allow, how they'll run and so on. Just like Firefox just decided to change their extension API, now whether it's a good idea is a different story but they're certainly entitled to do so. Would you be opposed to IE dropping support for ActiveX plug-ins too? I'm here assuming that there's some technical difference in flash between ads and video players, not that Google is actually sitting there saying that's an ad and that is not.
But you're saying that because you don't like Flash or Ads. Also, there is a difference in dropping or retiring something, like Active-X, and modifying the functionality of a plug-in that is used to display content created by a third party application. For example, most people would be upset if Google decided to display all JPGs (i.e. the photo of your dog) with the google logo on top of them. This isn't that much different.
That being said, as long as Adobe can offer a plugin with full functionality and it can be added to Chrome then I'm okay with this. As far as I know, the default flash plugin for Google is called Pepper and is probably written and supported by Google, which is why they can do this. According to the site below, you can enable the Adobe plugin which would presumably bypass any default flash behavior changes that Google makes to Chrome.
https://helpx.adobe.com/flash-...
Also, there are other browsers that people can use...
You forgot to add that legacy corporate apps will require flash for years to come. A lot of corporate training is still flash based.
Right Hand: Hold Alt Key
Left Hand: Type 54 on numeric keypad
These guys weren't armed with anything more than good training, and the mental preparedness to take action in a crisis, nevermind the guts to do so at considerable personal risk.
The average person will most likely freeze in a crisis, just out of sheer human nature. It takes a lot of training to overcome that, and to build up the instinct to act (nevermind in a beneficial manner), which in a combat situation is often the difference between life and death.
It's fun when people make assumptions based on their own biases... The latest update from CNN mentions that a civilian was also involved in subduing the shooter. "The three men -- a member of the Air Force, an inactive National Guard member and a civilian -- responded quickly, possibly preventing a deadly attack on the high-speed Thalys train." So, what were you saying about the average person again?
Everyone has fight or flight instincts and each situation is different. I would expect armed forces personnel to be more likely to respond quickly. That being said, it doesn't negate the fact that there are civilians who keep their heads in a crisis and who would respond.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/21/...
I like lots of games, but I am not sure they fit into a genre. I like games with a robust offline experience, and I don't like to play online at all, especially against people who have way too many hours and way too many dollars to throw at mods so you can't enjoy your experience at all. I like Red Dead Redemption, Grand Theft Auto, Final Fantasy, Skyrim, Lego Movie Adaptations and Gran Turismo. Don't care for sports games or World of Warcraft or online FPS.
My tastes are similar but I do like FPS games... Oblivion, Skyrim, Far Cry, Uncharted, Fallout, Dark Souls, Wolfenstein, Bioshock
I don't like MMO games simply because I don't have the time to put into grinding to make it worth it. And don't get me started about today's online FPS games. It used to be that they were balanced enough that a casual player could survive long enough to at least explore the map a bit before getting killed. Most of them now seem to be designed to kill off fresh meat as soon as they appear.
Most chess players have no interest in checkers, poker, or go.
I'm not sure that's true. I've never met a chess play who couldn't play checkers. Chess players often switch to poker, and there are even chess + poker tournaments.
Funny, I play chess, not at a tournament level but for fun, and I sometimes like playing checkers and love playing poker. Of course, playing poker, for me, isn't about playing cards it's about having fun with my friends. As for Go, the only reason why a lot of people don't play Go is because it isn't all that popular, at least in the US and Canada. I would think that a lot of Chess players would also enjoy Go because it does require strategy.
You must work for the same company I do. We have a huge group known as Engineering that does not fall under IT that absolutely does need to use such tools. Typical IT arrogance.
No, it's not IT arrogance, it's a generalization... Generalizations by their nature have exceptions to the rule.
The vast majority of users in a company that are not in IT do not need Wireshark or network analysis tools. However, there are companies that produce, engineer, and /or support electronics, software, etc. where these tools might come in handy to verify that the product is working correctly. Obviously, those users would be an exception to the rule.
With the move towards corporate web based applications, there is even less software that needs to be installed than in the past.
Judging by the information in the article, it sounds like Amazon is High School all over again. People sniping at each other to increase their status, the politically connected get protected, cliques banding together for survival, etc.. The only difference is the lack of life outside of the environment. Sounds like hell to me....
I honestly can't remember the last time I actually went to a store to do research for an online purchase. It just doesn't happen. If I actually take the time and go to a store and they have what I need/want it is very unlikely that I'll go back home and order whatever it was to save a few bucks and spend even more time waiting for it to be delivered. I don't doubt that there are people who do that but judging by the number of people living paycheck to paycheck I doubt they are in the majority.
I agree about the research comment. I've never gone to a store for product research except for vehicles like cars, boats, etc..
There are three situations where I go to a store to buy anything but groceries:
1. When I need something right away and overnight shipping is more than 3% of the item cost. Typically in this situation, the item wouldn't get to me on time if I ordered online with 2 day shipping. I would have to pay through the nose for next day. It's usually when I'm about to go on vacation and I forgot to buy something.
2. Clothes. Yes, most online clothing stores have free return policies but its more inconvenient than running down to the nearest clothing store. Shoes and sneakers are the hardest to buy as, it seems, not one shoe manufacturer uses the same sizing chart. Kohls actually does a good job here. I can try on stuff in store, scan the bar-code with their mobile app, and order through their online store. Usually I only do this if they don't have the size/style I want in the store. That being said, I have been buying dress shirts online.
3. Same Price. If the store has the item at a similar or same price as I can find online I will buy from the store. At that point it's more convenient for me to drive to the local store and pick it up or grab it while I am already there for something else.
Not a bad idea. Each passenger gets a free 200lb total encumberance allotment, whether that's human weight or luggage weight..
Except that this would open up a can of worms like sexism, etc.. Why should an average guy pay more for a plane flight with the same weight of luggage as an average woman? Like it or not, men tend to be heavier, even if they are at their ideal weight.
Of course, they could go with some sort of standard for height, weigh, sex, etc. and you only pay for the amount that you are over your ideal weight. But this, again, gets into privacy concerns because it would be recorded somewhere.
In other words, implementing a standard weight of passenger + carry-on just wouldn't work.
The United States of America will still exist in 30-40 years?
Did you perhaps mean instead the New Confederate States of America? The Republic of Texas? The Free Republic of Idaho? Mexarkana? Absaroka? The Jefferson Freehold? New Deseret? The Republic of Sequoyah?
Nope... Canada... Canada will be the richest country in the world due to it's fresh water reserves and will buy up the US for pennies on the Loonie... (grin)
If you want an array of seismic sensors, build one. If you want an inter-continental data network, build that. Don't try to hack the one to do the job of the other.
Exactly. The complication and the added failure modes would go up drastically if sensors were incorporated into communications lines. What happens if all of the sensors fail? Do you tear up the communications lines just to fix them?
What you do is build a separate system, build relationships with the communications companies, and make a business deal to have it laid at the same time as undersea cables. I agree that there are economic benefits to sharing the same deployment resources, but they should be separate infrastructures.