Actually, MS dropped about 20% of the base of applications compatibility-wise, only in the Win32 share of applications. Plenty of apps that ran on NT at one time will not run on Win2K3. This has been acknowledged, and seemingly MS doesn't give a shit. It's ok by me, I see Server 2K3 as something that's built for being a web-server or an application server. Those apps that once ran probably don't fit into those two categories, which means that I'd be running them on Win2K somewhere. I don't expect to use it as a workstation, nor do I expect to use it as a database server.
That, and the huge monster running after you through the parking garage, tipping over SUVs as it charges... breathtaking. There are so many great moments in that game. I can't wait for the sequel.
ooh. That part made me hyperventilate. And then you actually figure out how to kill the bugger, and you're like "Cool!" I've never really been into puzzles that happen in-game, they usually don't mesh with my style of thinking. I actually figured this one out, and I was like "Dizamn, I can do this shit."
Yeah, most puzzles in games are those obscure things where there's only one way to figure it out. Myst was like that, where you had to actually take notes in various places, because the answers to those puzzles were laying around in the library.
I've always been more for the puzzles presented in Deus Ex, where you could get through something any number of ways. The part where the NSF is holding a bunch of people hostage under Battery Park, for instance, you could get by with the scramble grenades and a couple well-placed head shots. Even better, you could find the entrance to the ventilation and drop a few gas grenades... and take them out when they're immobilized. I'm not even sure if it's necessary to even save the hostages, so you could just blow them all to smithereens if you want to.
I also like the games where you're given tasks to do, but they are not completely necessary. At the same time, you're given the ability to enhance the character that you're in, giving yourself some uniqueness in the world. RPG's are pretty good for this, until you run into crap like Diablo II, where there are a limited number of ways that you should make your character, because you probably wouldn't get very far if you didn't. Level limitations suck. If level limitations were removed from RPG games, then you'd have a really interesting assortment of characters, each uber-powerful in their own way.
I like Morrowind and Deus Ex. I also enjoy Neverwinter Nights, even though I think that AD&D rules impose a level cap on any non-human character (I seriously think that this rule sucks). Morrowind has a central story that you can choose to complete to "finish" the game, but there are a number of other quests that you can complete as well. You can join one of the three great houses, join any number of the guilds, try to get into the criminal element, get rid of the criminal element, make your character anti-house, join the army, join the clergy... It's got that amazing flexibility that really doesn't exist in many other games. It's the same way, kinda, with Deus Ex. There are some options that are kinda dumb, like weapon specializations... why would anyone want to become a master in anything but rifles?
Ah well. Storyline is also very important, but I think what makes or breaks the game for me is being able to construct a unique character, and being able to solve problems in my own way. I don't care much for prescriptives, since they only make the game more like a rail-shooter, where you've been there and done that, and you can't go back and enjoy. Killing Diablo over and over again is not very appealing.
the humans would have been but a red paint job at the back of the cabin by then anyways
No. It's the Front of the cabin. I doubt the cabin would face the opposite direction of travel.
I don't know how much energy is required for vaporization, but maybe the kinetic energy conversion would be enough? If that were the case, the cabin would be crumpled, but cleaen.
I'd rather have BT produce my tracks. He's produced a number of soundtracks, albums, wrote the soundtrack to "The Fast and the Furious," and has created some of the most popular club music in the world.
He probably costs a lot of money too, come to think of it. The difference, however, is that he's talented, whereas P. Diddy is not. You can't make up for substance with Pinache, but most Americans don't understand that subtle point.
Conversely: Epic will put the single best level in the demo (maybe the defense level w/ sniper rifles and artillary). Then people will get it, be wowed by the amazing graphics, have their heart pounding because they think that it's so exciting...
Then they'll buy the game and find that it has a thin plot that doesn't seem to go anywhere. Seriously, the plot is the same as Zelda... mainly get pieces of this miraculous old-technology and then face the evil of all evils.
:Yawn: The parent has it right. The game content sucks. The presentation is astounding. I justify my purchase of it as supporting the research and development of the engine. (Heh... kinda like Wolf3d-the original, Doom, Heretic, Quake, Quake 3......) Sorry, but the original ID games have the same problem. They were brand new to the market, which is why they did so well. I play the original Doom now, and I know where every secret door is, I know how to get every single item, I can play on Nightmare with custom respawn and beat the game. It just doesn't have a plot.
Have you seen those shots? They look very much like the new expansion to Morrowind. 'Course, the graphics aren't quite the quality that Morrowind has, but it seems that the world has the same atmosphere.
I would love it if the world of the Elder Scrolls made it onto the 'net somewhere. It's got extensibility, and if they used that in conjunction with some centralized servers, they could ensure that everyone has got all of those cool unique items.
Another thing about the MMORPGS... I don't see why making an extensible world is so impossible. Just keep a team of designers employed full time, adding chunks of land here and there. I imagine that there'd be a point where storage becomes an issue, but storage solutions are not a static technology. New areas = new dungeouns. New area = new weapon base styles. It'd be cool if users could submit graphical suggestions for items, skins and models and such, if they make it in to the game, they could be like those completely unique items (Aegis Fang style).
I'm not sure if some of that type of stuff is going to show up in World of Warcraft, but it'd be nice to see them as a general trend in world/system design.
That's usually what most anti-Christians say. The fact is that the majority of Babylonian literature came from Jews. The oral histories, for instance, are very very close, but the narrative contained within the pentateuch are much more accurate than anything from Babylon. Since Moses wrote the first two books, it goes to show that the Jewish culture was the one to be cloned.
Interestingly enough, they were also the ones that were subjected to slavery the most. It's not the first time, however, that the masters have adopted the oral histories of the slaves.
The epic of Gilgamesh is a corruption of Noah's ark. The Babylonian version of the Exodus are completely lacking, while the Biblical version has yet to be proven wrong.
The last thing we need is to have the software industry start to look like the healthcare industry, where everyone pays 3x what they should to cover the insurance in case someone needs to sue someone else.
As a programmer, I'll say that I wouldn't mind getting paid as much as the people in the health care industry do.:-)
Perhaps the entrance level barriers for CS need to be raised to the level of doctors, so that everyone has a massive base of standardized training. That way, if you hire a programmer, you know that you're going to get something out of him that isn't mediocre. If you do, he'll have malpractice insurance that bails him out, even though he'll never have another job again.
It's unrealistic, but I'd prefer that to the diluted intelligence of the industry that we currently have.
Microsoft contends that setting standards could stifle innovation, and the cost of litigation and damages could mean more expensive software.
Basically, MS is saying that they are not responsible for the product that they managed to get into a monopolistic position in the market. When people get a computer, they usually don't have any other option then to get one of the MS OS's. When the consumer is not given that choice, the consumer should not be held responsible for the shortcomings of the OS. If they plug their Win2K box into the cable modem without updating (with patches that have no warrauntee), after installing frontpage... they should not be the ones responsible for an infection of Code Red.
When you have a company that says that their innovative capacities are inhibited by the responsiblity that they may be required to take, that's when the company needs to reconsider their values. If a country depends on your product to operate, your product alone, then you had better make that product the best damn product ever. That includes a bulletproof security scheme, it includes error-trapping and stable code, it includes fixing everything that causes a blue screen out of the box.
Since MS has been found in court to have a monopoly, they must shoulder the responsibility to the consumer. If they do not, then they've got to do something to allow competition to exist on the desktop. The consumer comes before the company. If what MS says seems to be beneficial to the consumer, it's probably enough of a euphamism to cover up something that's like "MS ain't gonna pay for what they're baby broke."
Hey! Mr. Ballsmear is saying dirty things about how the community that creates Linux is not innovative. Of course, we will overlook the extensive use of BSD code within Windows, or the fact that they can't come up with better authentication and security mechanisms than kerberos.
Sometimes businesses don't want innovation. They want stability,clear upgrade paths, and last but not least, security. My boss still uses CMD.exe to do most of his work, even though he's running windows 2000. Most of the guys here can code in Linux as well as in Windows, the environment really doesn't matter... as long as we've got a text editor and a debugger.
If it works, it's good. If it's got newfangled features that break every now and then or open new holes to someone who likes to break things, then we don't want it.
Now, windows 2003 does have some very interesting and great features. I can't say that they are innovative, because an HTTP listener exists in the Linux kernel, because a separate process VM running an application server has been done, because IL compilers have been made in academic environments...
Nothing that MS does is innovative, to tell the truth. They use stuff that other people have developed, and give it a candy-coated shell to make it palatable. That's the crux of it. I can't believe that Steve is lying outright right here. Someone should cut out his tongue or something... he really doesn't make MS look "good" to IT companies.
Re:Right tool for the job
on
Linus on DRM
·
· Score: 1
He thinks a long way ahead.
And while his beta version of Abiword crashes during a sudden heart attack, causing him to lose the will he was typing up... And he got to thinking, gee, I could've used a template in MS Word to do this.
RMS has a distorted view of what actual freedom is. He thinks in terms of freedom of the code over the freedom of the individual, which shows up in the GPL. A person is not free to utilize GPL code in his/her proprietary project, because the release of the source code could mean the end of the company. This code is free, in effect using the individuals that contribute to it, but there is no reciprocity.
I'd say that the BSD lisence is more free than the GPL, just because it doesn't care how you use the code. I could come out with a binary-only version of BSD, and it would legal (not that I would want to). The BSD lisence ensures that I get the appropriate credit for what I wrote, but there's a mutual benefit for both the code and the coder. BSD doesn't impose restrictions, while GPL does. If you want complete and utter freedom, then there's always the public domain...
You're assuming here that every customer is maxing out his/her bandwith all the time, as if every customer had a P2P client running all the time and enough active downloads that more data is available than he/she can suck down.
I think the point is that there is a maximum amount that you can utilize in a day. My cable modem is capped at 1.5 mbps (I hope). That given, I can download a max of 129600 mbits, or 16 GB in a day. I'm never going to see maximum bandwidth usage, we'll say it maxes out at around 800 mbps, which means I'd be able to d/l 8 GB.
Now, it's definitely possible that I'd do something like that, but I don't need more than one machine to do it. Get it? I have one machine continuously connected, continuously using the maximum amount of bandwidth that I can use, and it's going to be 8-16 GB / day. If I had 2 machines, I'd still be maxing out at 8-16 GB / day.
Having more machines connected to my gateway does not increase the amount of bandwidth available to my cable bridge. It does affect the amount of bandwidth that each of my machines get individually, in that it goes down with the number of machines. If it went up, then we'd have some interesting physics working in this world.
I really don't care if Comcast disconnects me for having more than one machine connected to my modem. Sure, it's against my TOS, but I could just as easily sign a contract with a more agreeable company if Comcast boots me. It'd be a small loss of service on my part, a big loss of profit on their part.
If I were them, I'd let the users do whatever they want, as long as they don't fuck with the cable bridge. That's all comcast really has to be accountable for. If they can show that any machine on the other end of the network cable that is plugged into the cable bridge is getting a signal, then they are following the terms of their contract. If the machine is not getting a signal, then they are liable. The end user should be liable for anything that occurs within the household that is a third party to the cable network.
The explanation that I thought of is that manhole covers are round so that they have an infinite number of ways to be put into place. If you had a square cover, you'd only have 4 options of putting the cover into place, if you had a triangle 3. When it's a circle, it doesn't matter what orientation the cover has in regards to the hole, which makes it an even simpler affair of getting the cover on.
<snide remark>You know construction workers... they need things as simple as possible.</snide remark>
When you jump, you do a little amount of work to get the big project done. Mt. Fuji moves in reference to the static world of you, you've pushed the Earth down, you've moved Mt. Fuji.
I remember when I was up there. The biggest protest that I ever witnessed was over the decision to get a couple kegs of Old Milwaukee Light over at Sig-Ro's, I think... Everything is very hazy, come to think of it.
MTU's where I got into/. as well. I find it amusing that the most promising kids that I met there are all finishing up elsewhere, just like me.:-)
They also stuck an http listener at the kernel level. It doesn't do anything except listen for http requests, and line up those requests in a queue. It is this way so that if IIS is restarted, clients are not disconnected.
The other difference (available in win2k) is the.NET ASP handling. Since ASP.NET pages are very much like java servlets, they become objects that can be handled in a separate process, on a separate machine. This is basically a clone of those J2EE Application Servers, but with.NET integrated to the core into the OS, the performace difference is astounding.
I'm no MS fan, mind you, but they've taken the J2EE idea, and refined it for performance benefits. When you make some benchmarks, side by side with code that's exactly the same, you'll see that.NET is probably much faster than J2EE. Sorry... but the JVM is running with lower process priority than.NET, and does not have the integration that.NET has.
Some say that integration is a bad thing. Some say it is a good thing. Me? I really don't give a shit now. I used to be all for the separation of code, drawing a distinction between the System and the OS proggies. I admire the Unix philosophy of stringing together a bunch of tiny programs to accomplish something more complex. I've also seen the performance benefits of an integrated system (monolithic kernel anyone? ahem), and why not take it a step further. As long as MS is there to blame for their security problems (which there will be plenty, undoubtedly), I don't see why people should turn down their product. It's built for the sole purpose of serving web pages very quickly, and very reliably.
I think MS finally pulled their heads out of their asses and realized that they weren't getting anywhere with the shitty-assed ASP, nor were they going anywhere with a server that cut everyone's connection if something went wrong. I like statefulness, I like the technology of J2EE. I also think that MS put a lot of effort into making.NET server (oh whatever, 2003) a very competitive product. All they have going against it is their reputation, and the fact that they have next to nothing as far as market share in the web server business.
It's also important to notice the concentration of data associated with HD's vs. RAM. There are no vendors out there that are peddling 256 MB HDDs, or even 1 GB HDDs. You just can't find them anymore, and the ones you do find are likely to be cheaper than their RAM equivalents will ever be.
RAM is costlier on a per MB basis than HDDs could ever be, and every pricing chart that takes this into account will show how this will probably never change. Heh. I'd love to pick up a 320 GB stick of RAM for ~$300... I wouldn't be able to use it all any time soon, but it would still be cool.
I can't wait till MRAM is finally figured out. That stuff is the wave of the future.
Yeah, I'd also like to point out that your CMOS has a battery. I've never had the case where my CMOS battery failed, but it could happen. If it happens, then I'll probably have to be running all default settings with my BIOS and stuff, with no boot password.
Having a battery in the system is nothing new, and I don't really see it as a problem.
Yeah, and you could also stick the image of your OS immediately after booting onto that thing. Than you could have a near-instantaneous boot speed, something which would be very nice. A throw-back to DOS 5.0.
There's no reason why you can't attach a charger ankle-band or wrist-band and have that connected to your cell phone by a wire. I've got an in-car cell charger, but I sure don't plug the physical cell phone into the cigarette lighter socket.
What would you expect from a culture that's been brought up on television? Everyone has become accustomed to understanding things when they view them, and less by their analysis. If children were brought up reading books as entertainment, and reading newspapers for the daily news, we'd be predicting a technology that made information easier to analyze, like some sort of database technology. Instead, we've gone in the way of having to see some sort of representation of data, instead of being able to draw conclusions from the data itself.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, MS dropped about 20% of the base of applications compatibility-wise, only in the Win32 share of applications. Plenty of apps that ran on NT at one time will not run on Win2K3. This has been acknowledged, and seemingly MS doesn't give a shit. It's ok by me, I see Server 2K3 as something that's built for being a web-server or an application server. Those apps that once ran probably don't fit into those two categories, which means that I'd be running them on Win2K somewhere. I don't expect to use it as a workstation, nor do I expect to use it as a database server.
That, and the huge monster running after you through the parking garage, tipping over SUVs as it charges... breathtaking. There are so many great moments in that game. I can't wait for the sequel.
ooh. That part made me hyperventilate. And then you actually figure out how to kill the bugger, and you're like "Cool!" I've never really been into puzzles that happen in-game, they usually don't mesh with my style of thinking. I actually figured this one out, and I was like "Dizamn, I can do this shit."
Yeah, most puzzles in games are those obscure things where there's only one way to figure it out. Myst was like that, where you had to actually take notes in various places, because the answers to those puzzles were laying around in the library.
I've always been more for the puzzles presented in Deus Ex, where you could get through something any number of ways. The part where the NSF is holding a bunch of people hostage under Battery Park, for instance, you could get by with the scramble grenades and a couple well-placed head shots. Even better, you could find the entrance to the ventilation and drop a few gas grenades... and take them out when they're immobilized. I'm not even sure if it's necessary to even save the hostages, so you could just blow them all to smithereens if you want to.
I also like the games where you're given tasks to do, but they are not completely necessary. At the same time, you're given the ability to enhance the character that you're in, giving yourself some uniqueness in the world. RPG's are pretty good for this, until you run into crap like Diablo II, where there are a limited number of ways that you should make your character, because you probably wouldn't get very far if you didn't. Level limitations suck. If level limitations were removed from RPG games, then you'd have a really interesting assortment of characters, each uber-powerful in their own way.
I like Morrowind and Deus Ex. I also enjoy Neverwinter Nights, even though I think that AD&D rules impose a level cap on any non-human character (I seriously think that this rule sucks). Morrowind has a central story that you can choose to complete to "finish" the game, but there are a number of other quests that you can complete as well. You can join one of the three great houses, join any number of the guilds, try to get into the criminal element, get rid of the criminal element, make your character anti-house, join the army, join the clergy... It's got that amazing flexibility that really doesn't exist in many other games. It's the same way, kinda, with Deus Ex. There are some options that are kinda dumb, like weapon specializations... why would anyone want to become a master in anything but rifles?
Ah well. Storyline is also very important, but I think what makes or breaks the game for me is being able to construct a unique character, and being able to solve problems in my own way. I don't care much for prescriptives, since they only make the game more like a rail-shooter, where you've been there and done that, and you can't go back and enjoy. Killing Diablo over and over again is not very appealing.
the humans would have been but a red paint job at the back of the cabin by then anyways
No. It's the Front of the cabin. I doubt the cabin would face the opposite direction of travel.
I don't know how much energy is required for vaporization, but maybe the kinetic energy conversion would be enough? If that were the case, the cabin would be crumpled, but cleaen.
I'd rather have BT produce my tracks. He's produced a number of soundtracks, albums, wrote the soundtrack to "The Fast and the Furious," and has created some of the most popular club music in the world.
He probably costs a lot of money too, come to think of it. The difference, however, is that he's talented, whereas P. Diddy is not. You can't make up for substance with Pinache, but most Americans don't understand that subtle point.
Conversely: Epic will put the single best level in the demo (maybe the defense level w/ sniper rifles and artillary). Then people will get it, be wowed by the amazing graphics, have their heart pounding because they think that it's so exciting...
Then they'll buy the game and find that it has a thin plot that doesn't seem to go anywhere. Seriously, the plot is the same as Zelda... mainly get pieces of this miraculous old-technology and then face the evil of all evils.
:Yawn: The parent has it right. The game content sucks. The presentation is astounding. I justify my purchase of it as supporting the research and development of the engine. (Heh... kinda like Wolf3d-the original, Doom, Heretic, Quake, Quake 3......) Sorry, but the original ID games have the same problem. They were brand new to the market, which is why they did so well. I play the original Doom now, and I know where every secret door is, I know how to get every single item, I can play on Nightmare with custom respawn and beat the game. It just doesn't have a plot.
Have you seen those shots? They look very much like the new expansion to Morrowind. 'Course, the graphics aren't quite the quality that Morrowind has, but it seems that the world has the same atmosphere.
I would love it if the world of the Elder Scrolls made it onto the 'net somewhere. It's got extensibility, and if they used that in conjunction with some centralized servers, they could ensure that everyone has got all of those cool unique items.
Another thing about the MMORPGS... I don't see why making an extensible world is so impossible. Just keep a team of designers employed full time, adding chunks of land here and there. I imagine that there'd be a point where storage becomes an issue, but storage solutions are not a static technology. New areas = new dungeouns. New area = new weapon base styles. It'd be cool if users could submit graphical suggestions for items, skins and models and such, if they make it in to the game, they could be like those completely unique items (Aegis Fang style).
I'm not sure if some of that type of stuff is going to show up in World of Warcraft, but it'd be nice to see them as a general trend in world/system design.
it will not run on more platforms than one can shake a stick at.
I've seen chicks trying to run on platforms too, but they always seem to fall over.
That's usually what most anti-Christians say. The fact is that the majority of Babylonian literature came from Jews. The oral histories, for instance, are very very close, but the narrative contained within the pentateuch are much more accurate than anything from Babylon. Since Moses wrote the first two books, it goes to show that the Jewish culture was the one to be cloned.
Interestingly enough, they were also the ones that were subjected to slavery the most. It's not the first time, however, that the masters have adopted the oral histories of the slaves.
The epic of Gilgamesh is a corruption of Noah's ark. The Babylonian version of the Exodus are completely lacking, while the Biblical version has yet to be proven wrong.
The last thing we need is to have the software industry start to look like the healthcare industry, where everyone pays 3x what they should to cover the insurance in case someone needs to sue someone else.
As a programmer, I'll say that I wouldn't mind getting paid as much as the people in the health care industry do. :-)
Perhaps the entrance level barriers for CS need to be raised to the level of doctors, so that everyone has a massive base of standardized training. That way, if you hire a programmer, you know that you're going to get something out of him that isn't mediocre. If you do, he'll have malpractice insurance that bails him out, even though he'll never have another job again.
It's unrealistic, but I'd prefer that to the diluted intelligence of the industry that we currently have.
Microsoft contends that setting standards could stifle innovation, and the cost of litigation and damages could mean more expensive software.
Basically, MS is saying that they are not responsible for the product that they managed to get into a monopolistic position in the market. When people get a computer, they usually don't have any other option then to get one of the MS OS's. When the consumer is not given that choice, the consumer should not be held responsible for the shortcomings of the OS. If they plug their Win2K box into the cable modem without updating (with patches that have no warrauntee), after installing frontpage... they should not be the ones responsible for an infection of Code Red.
When you have a company that says that their innovative capacities are inhibited by the responsiblity that they may be required to take, that's when the company needs to reconsider their values. If a country depends on your product to operate, your product alone, then you had better make that product the best damn product ever. That includes a bulletproof security scheme, it includes error-trapping and stable code, it includes fixing everything that causes a blue screen out of the box.
Since MS has been found in court to have a monopoly, they must shoulder the responsibility to the consumer. If they do not, then they've got to do something to allow competition to exist on the desktop. The consumer comes before the company. If what MS says seems to be beneficial to the consumer, it's probably enough of a euphamism to cover up something that's like "MS ain't gonna pay for what they're baby broke."
grr. This crap really frustrates me.
Microsoft Bob.
Hey! Mr. Ballsmear is saying dirty things about how the community that creates Linux is not innovative. Of course, we will overlook the extensive use of BSD code within Windows, or the fact that they can't come up with better authentication and security mechanisms than kerberos.
Sometimes businesses don't want innovation. They want stability,clear upgrade paths, and last but not least, security. My boss still uses CMD.exe to do most of his work, even though he's running windows 2000. Most of the guys here can code in Linux as well as in Windows, the environment really doesn't matter... as long as we've got a text editor and a debugger.
If it works, it's good. If it's got newfangled features that break every now and then or open new holes to someone who likes to break things, then we don't want it.
Now, windows 2003 does have some very interesting and great features. I can't say that they are innovative, because an HTTP listener exists in the Linux kernel, because a separate process VM running an application server has been done, because IL compilers have been made in academic environments...
Nothing that MS does is innovative, to tell the truth. They use stuff that other people have developed, and give it a candy-coated shell to make it palatable. That's the crux of it. I can't believe that Steve is lying outright right here. Someone should cut out his tongue or something... he really doesn't make MS look "good" to IT companies.
He thinks a long way ahead.
And while his beta version of Abiword crashes during a sudden heart attack, causing him to lose the will he was typing up... And he got to thinking, gee, I could've used a template in MS Word to do this.
RMS has a distorted view of what actual freedom is. He thinks in terms of freedom of the code over the freedom of the individual, which shows up in the GPL. A person is not free to utilize GPL code in his/her proprietary project, because the release of the source code could mean the end of the company. This code is free, in effect using the individuals that contribute to it, but there is no reciprocity.
I'd say that the BSD lisence is more free than the GPL, just because it doesn't care how you use the code. I could come out with a binary-only version of BSD, and it would legal (not that I would want to). The BSD lisence ensures that I get the appropriate credit for what I wrote, but there's a mutual benefit for both the code and the coder. BSD doesn't impose restrictions, while GPL does. If you want complete and utter freedom, then there's always the public domain...
You're assuming here that every customer is maxing out his/her bandwith all the time, as if every customer had a P2P client running all the time and enough active downloads that more data is available than he/she can suck down.
I think the point is that there is a maximum amount that you can utilize in a day. My cable modem is capped at 1.5 mbps (I hope). That given, I can download a max of 129600 mbits, or 16 GB in a day. I'm never going to see maximum bandwidth usage, we'll say it maxes out at around 800 mbps, which means I'd be able to d/l 8 GB.
Now, it's definitely possible that I'd do something like that, but I don't need more than one machine to do it. Get it? I have one machine continuously connected, continuously using the maximum amount of bandwidth that I can use, and it's going to be 8-16 GB / day. If I had 2 machines, I'd still be maxing out at 8-16 GB / day.
Having more machines connected to my gateway does not increase the amount of bandwidth available to my cable bridge. It does affect the amount of bandwidth that each of my machines get individually, in that it goes down with the number of machines. If it went up, then we'd have some interesting physics working in this world.
I really don't care if Comcast disconnects me for having more than one machine connected to my modem. Sure, it's against my TOS, but I could just as easily sign a contract with a more agreeable company if Comcast boots me. It'd be a small loss of service on my part, a big loss of profit on their part.
If I were them, I'd let the users do whatever they want, as long as they don't fuck with the cable bridge. That's all comcast really has to be accountable for. If they can show that any machine on the other end of the network cable that is plugged into the cable bridge is getting a signal, then they are following the terms of their contract. If the machine is not getting a signal, then they are liable. The end user should be liable for anything that occurs within the household that is a third party to the cable network.
The explanation that I thought of is that manhole covers are round so that they have an infinite number of ways to be put into place. If you had a square cover, you'd only have 4 options of putting the cover into place, if you had a triangle 3. When it's a circle, it doesn't matter what orientation the cover has in regards to the hole, which makes it an even simpler affair of getting the cover on.
<snide remark>You know construction workers... they need things as simple as possible.</snide remark>
The true answer is "I'd jump."
When you jump, you do a little amount of work to get the big project done. Mt. Fuji moves in reference to the static world of you, you've pushed the Earth down, you've moved Mt. Fuji.
I remember when I was up there. The biggest protest that I ever witnessed was over the decision to get a couple kegs of Old Milwaukee Light over at Sig-Ro's, I think... Everything is very hazy, come to think of it.
MTU's where I got into /. as well. I find it amusing that the most promising kids that I met there are all finishing up elsewhere, just like me. :-)
knowing tech, there'll be a couple kegs involved
They also stuck an http listener at the kernel level. It doesn't do anything except listen for http requests, and line up those requests in a queue. It is this way so that if IIS is restarted, clients are not disconnected.
The other difference (available in win2k) is the .NET ASP handling. Since ASP.NET pages are very much like java servlets, they become objects that can be handled in a separate process, on a separate machine. This is basically a clone of those J2EE Application Servers, but with .NET integrated to the core into the OS, the performace difference is astounding.
I'm no MS fan, mind you, but they've taken the J2EE idea, and refined it for performance benefits. When you make some benchmarks, side by side with code that's exactly the same, you'll see that .NET is probably much faster than J2EE. Sorry... but the JVM is running with lower process priority than .NET, and does not have the integration that .NET has.
Some say that integration is a bad thing. Some say it is a good thing. Me? I really don't give a shit now. I used to be all for the separation of code, drawing a distinction between the System and the OS proggies. I admire the Unix philosophy of stringing together a bunch of tiny programs to accomplish something more complex. I've also seen the performance benefits of an integrated system (monolithic kernel anyone? ahem), and why not take it a step further. As long as MS is there to blame for their security problems (which there will be plenty, undoubtedly), I don't see why people should turn down their product. It's built for the sole purpose of serving web pages very quickly, and very reliably.
I think MS finally pulled their heads out of their asses and realized that they weren't getting anywhere with the shitty-assed ASP, nor were they going anywhere with a server that cut everyone's connection if something went wrong. I like statefulness, I like the technology of J2EE. I also think that MS put a lot of effort into making .NET server (oh whatever, 2003) a very competitive product. All they have going against it is their reputation, and the fact that they have next to nothing as far as market share in the web server business.
I should add that I'm no humour slouch either - apologies if I'm coming across like some dry, humourless ol
Dizamm! You must be a woman, or a really really gay man. The oversensitivity you display to not-so-funny jokes is not inherent in a typical male.
In both cases, you would probably have a bf.
It's also important to notice the concentration of data associated with HD's vs. RAM. There are no vendors out there that are peddling 256 MB HDDs, or even 1 GB HDDs. You just can't find them anymore, and the ones you do find are likely to be cheaper than their RAM equivalents will ever be.
RAM is costlier on a per MB basis than HDDs could ever be, and every pricing chart that takes this into account will show how this will probably never change. Heh. I'd love to pick up a 320 GB stick of RAM for ~$300... I wouldn't be able to use it all any time soon, but it would still be cool.
I can't wait till MRAM is finally figured out. That stuff is the wave of the future.
Yeah, I'd also like to point out that your CMOS has a battery. I've never had the case where my CMOS battery failed, but it could happen. If it happens, then I'll probably have to be running all default settings with my BIOS and stuff, with no boot password.
Having a battery in the system is nothing new, and I don't really see it as a problem.
Yeah, and you could also stick the image of your OS immediately after booting onto that thing. Than you could have a near-instantaneous boot speed, something which would be very nice. A throw-back to DOS 5.0.
There's no reason why you can't attach a charger ankle-band or wrist-band and have that connected to your cell phone by a wire. I've got an in-car cell charger, but I sure don't plug the physical cell phone into the cigarette lighter socket.
What would you expect from a culture that's been brought up on television? Everyone has become accustomed to understanding things when they view them, and less by their analysis. If children were brought up reading books as entertainment, and reading newspapers for the daily news, we'd be predicting a technology that made information easier to analyze, like some sort of database technology. Instead, we've gone in the way of having to see some sort of representation of data, instead of being able to draw conclusions from the data itself.