Wouldn't Intel run into physical limitations that simply don't allow chips to run at that low a temperature? I'm surprised Google isn't considering moving some of its data centres to Arctic locations where you get cool temperatures year-round. We've seen reports of appealing places like that on Slashdot before. (Of course, that would just be a short-term fix before we move the Earth to a farther orbit around the sun to avoid suffocating in our own waste heat like the Puppeteers in Niven's Ringworld).
I doubt anything physical is being done. Intel is very conservative in setting maximum operating temperatures. They're probably just promising Google that they'll cover those operated 5 C hotter under their warranty. If anything is actually being done to the hardware it's probably just altering the temp at which throttling occurs.
Interestingly, it's listed as coming with XP installed, so we'd guess Asus will be using some sort of proprietary touchscreen interface
I think this statement is also pulling straws.
A) An XP interface would NOT be any harder than a freaking mouse driver.
B) TabletPC XP already has multi-touch driver interfaces, that go back to 2003 from several vendors. Yes Apple Fans, WindowsXP TabeltPC devices existed back in 2003/2004 with multi-touch, far before any iPhone or multi-touch trackpads from Apple.
Crap like this is why Apple's marketing works so well, it gets repeated no matter what the truth is.
Thanks. I was insisting to a friend a couple months ago that another friend of mine had a multitouch Windows tablet of some sort long, long before Apple had anything of the sort. Now I can easily find the wiki pages to send to him to prove it.
You make is seem so objective. As a scientist I can honestly say that publishing has become a racket. It used to be you sent a little postcard and received a copy of the article from the scientist who had published it. Now they want you to buy the damn thing on line or subscribe to that journal for hundreds if not thousands a year.
Peer review is often no more than an attempt to stifle other peoples work. At one time science was brought to the people..may be that's why we are such an scientifically illiterate nation! We still put all the articles in Ivory Tower Journals that few people in the mainstream read.
Finally the politics of publishing is worse than you think furthermore, many journals it's not about how good the work is but whether you can adapt it to their "publishing format."
Your postcard method will still work 100% of the time. Every scientist will be delighted to email you a pdf of his requested paper. However, the new "racket" system, though incredibly expensive, does give new options for much more efficient distribution. Yes, the price is a major problem, but it didn't supplant the old system.
Information wants to be free. Why should authors expect to get paid for their paper? They should just have wealthy people "sponsor" their art/science like was done in Roman times. This wasy they are paid for the work that goes into the paper only. At least that's what the last year or so of reading Slashdot has told me.
You're trying to make a point about how silly it would be if what you said is true, aiming to make fun of the prevailing attitude toward piracy on/.
Amusingly, though, what you said already is true. Authors don't get money for papers. Instead, their income comes from wealthy people and organizations who "sponsor" their art or science. This way they are only paid for the work that goes into the paper.
Good in-ear headphones solve the noise floor problem much better than padded headphones or noise-canceling systems I've tried (including $3k aviation padded/noise-canceling headsets). They may feel strange or uncomfortable to some people, especially when first getting used to them, but they let you listen to music at low volume in almost any situation without worrying about background noise. Their problem is that they do it too well - I don't recommend walking near traffic with this type of speaker.
My comments are limited to quality headphones like Etymotic ER4s. The Apple in-ear headphones don't work so well for blocking out external noise, which may seem like a nice compromise for situations when you need to hear background sounds, but unfortunately they also don't do a good job of piping the music into your ear, so things will sound tinny.
Some of us listen to our music loud because we enjoy it. I exercise a lot and I need loud music to distract me from pain as well as road noises.
We know it's bad for us just as every smoker should know that smoking's bad for them.
I think that many or most listeners actually don't know how much listening to loud music can cost. Most kids listening to music on earbuds in the subway turned up so loud so that I can hear lyrics from across the aisle probably know it's "bad" but don't know that doing it for just an hour can (and likely will) affect their hearing for the rest of their lives. My hearing suffered from rock concerts, and after I few years the loss had become noticeable (which is a difficult thing unless you get your hearing tested, since there's no easy standard for comparison when your hearing gets worse over a timescale of months or years). I knew it was potentially destructive before I went to so many shows without any sort of ear protection, but I thought, as you say, that it was worth it because I enjoyed it. Had I realized the extent of the risk, I might have behaved differently.
Maybe the "technical solution" is to include hearing tests in every medical checkup, since they only take a couple minutes.
The annual total had 1 significant digit. The monthly total in the summary has 1 significant digit. You computer-people don't have to deal with error and such like we engineers, but imo 200/12 ~= 20 isn't really a problem.
Until women were allowed into Yale, rich kids could get in without any uncertainty, as long as they weren't dismally stupid. When women were added to the pool (and when other policies designed to attract upper class white students were dropped in 1970), suddenly the acceptance rate had to drop massively, and the choice was made to base all admissions (or nearly all) on academics.
W would probably have been rejected if he were to apply now. His daughter might be raised as a counter-example, but she was a good student in high school. It certainly still helps to be rich and well known, but it's no longer a carte blanche. Graduating's a lot harder now than it was then, too, but that's a different story.
I encountered the opposite situation that you described:
I was not allowed to join a closed mailing list for malware researchers due to the fact that I am not googleable. Had I spread my identity all over the net, had a personal homepage that accurately described me and my skills, had spread comments on my thoughts to various topics of my interest under my real name on the net etc. I probably would have been accepted. But the mentioned mailing list does not want to empower criminal or dubious individuals with working state-of-the-art malicious code so a good googleable online reputation within the community is very valuable.
Therefore I now am faced with the worry that my next potential employer might do the same. I mean, would you google a prospective employee? I would. And now imagine you had two potential employees, one who made a really good impression but you can not find anything about him on the net and a second guy who made a mediocre or even a good or maybe also a really good impression AND you find lots of positive things on the net about him. Like how people like him, blog entries about his specialization and generally: published advances to his profession like participation on public high profile mailing lists, published articles and write-ups, proof-of-concept code etc.
It is also common in my working field that potential employers initiate a background scan on you. Again: I guess being googleable might be an advantage here.
The only thing that helps me in this regard and that I have now but did not have when I applied for approval to the mentioned malware analysis group are my googleable certifications.
____________________ Mod all ACs as +1 in this thread as insightful comments might easily be written by ACs in this thread due to the topic.
Employers search for you online to find damning things. There's nothing they can find online that would make a positive impression that shouldn't be in your resume already. An employer doesn't use Google to do a background check to confirm certifications. Maybe I should add "reputable" before employer, but you get the idea.
If people think that Google is the only advertiser who's profiling people, they're daft. Any and every advertiser with a hint of intelligence studies their target audience and does everything within their power to know them better than they know themselves. Google just has more tools at their disposal than most advertising firms but they all do it.
Even more important than Google's large toolbox is the exceptionally large size of their user base, and the fact that Google knows the email addresses and real names of a large fraction of that base.
Console mmorpgs will likely be quasi fps games in a persistent world. When Sony released the new combat system for SWG the idea was to expand to consoles (or so I read on gaming news sites). It should give you a rough idea of what SOE's ideas were for console mmorpgs a couple years ago. For reference, the new SWG was a horrible embarrassment that finally sealed the coffin on a game that probably should have died awhile before it was introduced.
Then I guess all those benchmarks out there must be wrong. It's all a conspiracy to bury Microsoft's newest product. Yeah... that must be it.
And my first hand experience with Vista... also part of this conspiracy. My mother has a computer that was "built for Vista" (which, by the way, MS has admitted was a "marketing overstatement", ie. LIE). It's slow. It crashes ALOT. We've upgraded drivers. We've done a clean install. We took the necessary updates. It still crashes. It's still slow. It's still a load of crap.
My high-end system costs $4k. It has everything that anyone could want in a system. It can do ray tracing lightning fast but apparently can't load Vista in under 15 minutes, even after spending hours removing all the "sparkle" that is the new UI.
Your experience appears to be derived from a single desktop. I have used multiple desktops, laptops, and notebooks. I have also done research and generally kept up on the happenings in Vista in case there was some mystical transformation from trash-heap to XP-upgrade. I have yet to see it.
I'm glad it works for you, but, you are a minority of a minority and are in no way a benchmark for all Vista installs.
1) Look at recent benchmarks, say from 2008, and they're right and they agree with me (don't compare the dx10 version in Vista to dx9 in XP - compare apples to apples. dx10 seems to largely suck).
2) I have main firsthand experience only with my desktop, and more limited (I use them but they're not mine) experience with a couple of other desktops from work. None have crashed on me, none are slow. Definitely I understand that people with other hardware will have different experiences, but based on what I've heard not on internet forums but from other people who use Vista, the vast majority have zero problems.
3) My high end system cost...well, it's hard to say since I upgrade instead of rebuying everything each time I need a speed boost, but the core system was $600. That doesn't include my hard drives or monitor. Or the case or power supply. I'm using a C2D, so overclocking is easy. I really never felt comfortable with an OC on a computer important to me, but with this generation of CPU I feel safe running a 2.4 GHz chip at 3.2. My load CPU temperature is under 50 C, with a giant but only $30 heat sink, and as I've said, I've had zero crashes in Vista. My computer takes 25 seconds to go from the end of the BIOS checks to a login prompt. There's absolutely no way it should take 15 minutes for any OS to load for you. The delay is definitely not about the normal load of the OS - you have a major hardware or driver problem, which should be easy to find and fix. Log the boot process and see what's stalling for 14 minutes 30 seconds. That's the problem.
4) I don't recommend Vista for my friends. I'll tell them it's working for me, but I don't want to be the reason they spend $80 on an OS and then find that it's got some problem with some part of their system. It's unlikely, but it would be terrible if it happened. I don't want to inflict 15 minute boot times on anyone.
It also gives me access to 4 gigs of ram with zero driver problems, unlike XP64, and the general OS responsiveness is improved over XP.
How did you manage to accomplish this? Vista only shows 3 and a little bit gigs of RAM, even though my BIOS sees 4. Any help would be appreciated.
You're using Vista 32, I'm using 64. I suggest that you switch, though you might look up any very old piece of hardware you have first to make sure it has drivers. I have yet to find something I can't do or use in 64, but my machine has nothing older than 6 years in it. XP32 also only lets you use 3 gigs of your ram (though older versions at least lied and showed all 4), while XP64 lets you use all 4 gigs. Unfortunately, XP64 is much shakier and less supported than Vista64.
Your same Vista key will work if you want to install the 64 bit version. You can request a 64 bit disk from MS for the cost of shipping (or so I hear), or you can just borrow or download a copy and then use your key to do a fully legal installation.
Some of you may remember the Presidential debate only 6 days ago. As soon as I saw this story, I recalled McCain's argument for lowering business taxes. He used a very specific example...Ireland.
I took the liberty of transcribing McCain's words. Not to go totally partisan up in here....but you gotta give him props for calling this one:
The business tax. Right now, United States of America business pays the second highest business taxes in the world, 35%. Ireland pays 11%. Now, if you're a business person, and you can locate any place in the world, then obviously if you go to the country where it's 11% tax versus 35, you'll be able to create jobs, increase your business, make more investment, etc. I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses remain in America and create jobs.
It's not like he made an impressive prediction. As even the summary points out, businesses moving to Ireland is (very) old hat, and well known.
There does seem to be a bipartisan blindness to actually solving this problem. In addition to taxes sending businesses out of the US, low wages do as well. A good PhD scientist in China I know makes $7000/year and so do his peers. How do we compete with that? I'm open to suggestions, but all I see from major parties in the US is a whole lot of nothing.
I was going to write a well-written retort full of reason and fact, but I decided that it was a waste of time. Instead: *expletive* *expletive* *expletive*.
Moving on.
The people I've heard not complain about Vista use their computers as document editors and web-browsers. However, I have to remind you: my pocket watch can do this, and it costs less than a single install of Vista. To butcher an old phrase: Vista is about as useful as a tit on a bull, and about twice as ugly.
I declare your post to be silly fiction based on a lack of experience. There's nothing I did I XP that doesn't work in Vista. My Vista machine exists primarily because of gaming. My framerates using the same graphical options as in XP are the same as they were in XP, and that's normal and well documented - Vista stopped being slower for gaming long ago, and long before I was willing to install it. It also gives me access to 4 gigs of ram with zero driver problems, unlike XP64, and the general OS responsiveness is improved over XP. It about half a second to load Firefox for the first time after I boot, compared to a few seconds in XP. The same sort of improvement shows up in most apps, though Photoshop only loads at the same speed as it did on XP. Particularly nice is that Vista, while starting out (after a few days of superfetch) faster than XP, continues to extend its lead as time goes on. It seems to be immune from the general slowdown that affects so many XP installs.
Have you tasted it in a blind taste test? Or are you, like most if not all "wine snobs," simply fooling yourself into thinking expensive==good?
Yes, once a week for a year at Best Cellars in Manhattan, and then a little less often but for a few years at a place in Berkeley. Sometimes the cheap wine is good. Sometimes it is bad. Most wines that are reliably quite good (imo) are >$15 a bottle. If you drink much wine and care about the aspects of flavor that I do, you can very easily tell between different qualities. Also, it's not an effort to do so. I drink bad wine and I want to spit it out. I drink good wine and I like it. I drink great wine and have trouble stopping (another problem entirely). I'm sure tons of people want to know a lot about wine and think expensive stuff is good. I'm sure people who like certain types of wine (maybe dry whites) that I don't like have less of a powerful and obvious difference between good and bad within that genre than I do with favorite reds. However, I feel like your post is trying to say "they're all the same, the only difference is price," and that's absolutely not true. Quality of wine varies immensely, and there is a moderate price correlation through $50, at least.
And two buck Chuck isn't going to become Navarro through any amount of aging.
I've heard conflicting stories about those (real) pirates. Some say they are protecting their waters that were being over fished by foreigners, CNN of course just says that they are after it for the money.
Well, they attack transport ships, and when they get a microphone their demands are for money, not less fishing. So...
It's not so bad...my phone's screen is only 640x480, and a 640x480 image looks nice on it. I imagine most DS photos will be viewed on a similarly small device...say, a DS.
As a graduate student in physics, I have never seen a serious researcher use excel for data analysis.
Nor for that matter, is it common to see a scientist using windows for the OS--all linux and mac OS.
This is akin to writing a book about publishing scientific papers with office. Instead, learn LaTex...
The only group of people who use excel for large data analysis are financial types and MBAs. Need I remind you how that turned out?
Oh, so that's why at APS meetings I've seen maybe 5 presentations, ever (out of at the very least 500) given on something other than Windows (Ubuntu once, MacOS the other few times), despite the fact that nearly every speaker uses his or her own laptop for the presentation. Wait...my data seems to indicate that physicists hardly ever use Mac or Linux at all!
If we're just talking about computers controlling instruments, then I see about 90% Windows, 10% Linux if the instrument costs less than a million dollars, and 90% Linux, 10% Windows if it costs more than a million (and there's a transition zone in there somewhere, but my experience is mostly with $100k and $100MM equipment). CERN, for instance, is mostly controlled by non-Windows, but a lot of the laptops lying around there, presumably because people are going to do analysis on them, are Windows. Argonne is a healthy mix of Linux for controls and Windows for analysis. At MIT and Princeton, a couple professors use a Mac, a couple use Linux, most use Windows for personal use. Nearly everyone running stat mech simulations uses Linux for those, but a lot of those people have a personal Linux box.
I'm not going to say that it's good, but I will say that it's true.
It (be it a 3 million or 3 billion solar mass black hole) has an effect, one that you can easily calculate. The time dilation is almost nonexistent when you go more than a fraction of a percent of a galactic radius away from the black hole.
I sent Feinstein and Boxer letters a few years ago about copyright litigation. I got an email from Boxer's office that said "Thanks for your interest!." I got a personal, well reasoned response from Feinstein. She and I have written back and forth once a month ever since, sometimes with her emailing just to ask what I think about related legislation. For all I know it could be one of her staffers, but every email shows a lot of thought and is signed with her name.
Second-life's attempt to be the world's Metaverse turned out to be just a huge advertising/hacking cluster fuck. Not saying that that Lively won't be a advertising/hacking cluster fuck but at least it sounds it would be more open to programmers, which will allow for more diverse possibilities, so there could be just as much good stuff as bad.
Oh yes, we can always rely on Google to save us from advertising. Kinda funny, since Google is an advertising company.
Slashdot Mirror
Wouldn't Intel run into physical limitations that simply don't allow chips to run at that low a temperature? I'm surprised Google isn't considering moving some of its data centres to Arctic locations where you get cool temperatures year-round. We've seen reports of appealing places like that on Slashdot before. (Of course, that would just be a short-term fix before we move the Earth to a farther orbit around the sun to avoid suffocating in our own waste heat like the Puppeteers in Niven's Ringworld ).
I doubt anything physical is being done. Intel is very conservative in setting maximum operating temperatures. They're probably just promising Google that they'll cover those operated 5 C hotter under their warranty. If anything is actually being done to the hardware it's probably just altering the temp at which throttling occurs.
Interestingly, it's listed as coming with XP installed, so we'd guess Asus will be using some sort of proprietary touchscreen interface
I think this statement is also pulling straws.
A) An XP interface would NOT be any harder than a freaking mouse driver.
B) TabletPC XP already has multi-touch driver interfaces, that go back to 2003 from several vendors. Yes Apple Fans, WindowsXP TabeltPC devices existed back in 2003/2004 with multi-touch, far before any iPhone or multi-touch trackpads from Apple.
Crap like this is why Apple's marketing works so well, it gets repeated no matter what the truth is.
Thanks. I was insisting to a friend a couple months ago that another friend of mine had a multitouch Windows tablet of some sort long, long before Apple had anything of the sort. Now I can easily find the wiki pages to send to him to prove it.
You make is seem so objective. As a scientist I can honestly say that publishing has become a racket. It used to be you sent a little postcard and received a copy of the article from the scientist who had published it. Now they want you to buy the damn thing on line or subscribe to that journal for hundreds if not thousands a year.
Peer review is often no more than an attempt to stifle other peoples work. At one time science was brought to the people..may be that's why we are such an scientifically illiterate nation! We still put all the articles in Ivory Tower Journals that few people in the mainstream read.
Finally the politics of publishing is worse than you think furthermore, many journals it's not about how good the work is but whether you can adapt it to their "publishing format."
Your postcard method will still work 100% of the time. Every scientist will be delighted to email you a pdf of his requested paper. However, the new "racket" system, though incredibly expensive, does give new options for much more efficient distribution. Yes, the price is a major problem, but it didn't supplant the old system.
Information wants to be free. Why should authors expect to get paid for their paper? They should just have wealthy people "sponsor" their art/science like was done in Roman times. This wasy they are paid for the work that goes into the paper only. At least that's what the last year or so of reading Slashdot has told me.
You're trying to make a point about how silly it would be if what you said is true, aiming to make fun of the prevailing attitude toward piracy on /.
Amusingly, though, what you said already is true. Authors don't get money for papers. Instead, their income comes from wealthy people and organizations who "sponsor" their art or science. This way they are only paid for the work that goes into the paper.
Good in-ear headphones solve the noise floor problem much better than padded headphones or noise-canceling systems I've tried (including $3k aviation padded/noise-canceling headsets). They may feel strange or uncomfortable to some people, especially when first getting used to them, but they let you listen to music at low volume in almost any situation without worrying about background noise. Their problem is that they do it too well - I don't recommend walking near traffic with this type of speaker.
My comments are limited to quality headphones like Etymotic ER4s. The Apple in-ear headphones don't work so well for blocking out external noise, which may seem like a nice compromise for situations when you need to hear background sounds, but unfortunately they also don't do a good job of piping the music into your ear, so things will sound tinny.
Some of us listen to our music loud because we enjoy it. I exercise a lot and I need loud music to distract me from pain as well as road noises.
We know it's bad for us just as every smoker should know that smoking's bad for them.
I think that many or most listeners actually don't know how much listening to loud music can cost. Most kids listening to music on earbuds in the subway turned up so loud so that I can hear lyrics from across the aisle probably know it's "bad" but don't know that doing it for just an hour can (and likely will) affect their hearing for the rest of their lives. My hearing suffered from rock concerts, and after I few years the loss had become noticeable (which is a difficult thing unless you get your hearing tested, since there's no easy standard for comparison when your hearing gets worse over a timescale of months or years). I knew it was potentially destructive before I went to so many shows without any sort of ear protection, but I thought, as you say, that it was worth it because I enjoyed it. Had I realized the extent of the risk, I might have behaved differently.
Maybe the "technical solution" is to include hearing tests in every medical checkup, since they only take a couple minutes.
The annual total had 1 significant digit. The monthly total in the summary has 1 significant digit. You computer-people don't have to deal with error and such like we engineers, but imo 200/12 ~= 20 isn't really a problem.
George W. Bush graduated from Yale.
Until women were allowed into Yale, rich kids could get in without any uncertainty, as long as they weren't dismally stupid. When women were added to the pool (and when other policies designed to attract upper class white students were dropped in 1970), suddenly the acceptance rate had to drop massively, and the choice was made to base all admissions (or nearly all) on academics.
W would probably have been rejected if he were to apply now. His daughter might be raised as a counter-example, but she was a good student in high school. It certainly still helps to be rich and well known, but it's no longer a carte blanche. Graduating's a lot harder now than it was then, too, but that's a different story.
I encountered the opposite situation that you described:
I was not allowed to join a closed mailing list for malware researchers due to the fact that I am not googleable. Had I spread my identity all over the net, had a personal homepage that accurately described me and my skills, had spread comments on my thoughts to various topics of my interest under my real name on the net etc. I probably would have been accepted. But the mentioned mailing list does not want to empower criminal or dubious individuals with working state-of-the-art malicious code so a good googleable online reputation within the community is very valuable.
Therefore I now am faced with the worry that my next potential employer might do the same. I mean, would you google a prospective employee? I would. And now imagine you had two potential employees, one who made a really good impression but you can not find anything about him on the net and a second guy who made a mediocre or even a good or maybe also a really good impression AND you find lots of positive things on the net about him. Like how people like him, blog entries about his specialization and generally: published advances to his profession like participation on public high profile mailing lists, published articles and write-ups, proof-of-concept code etc.
It is also common in my working field that potential employers initiate a background scan on you. Again: I guess being googleable might be an advantage here.
The only thing that helps me in this regard and that I have now but did not have when I applied for approval to the mentioned malware analysis group are my googleable certifications.
____________________
Mod all ACs as +1 in this thread as insightful comments might easily be written by ACs in this thread due to the topic.
Employers search for you online to find damning things. There's nothing they can find online that would make a positive impression that shouldn't be in your resume already. An employer doesn't use Google to do a background check to confirm certifications. Maybe I should add "reputable" before employer, but you get the idea.
The NYTimes thinks I'm a 98 year old woman in Afghanistan, who makes less than $20K/yr as the CEO of her own company.
Ahem...a large number of people have at some point in time thought I'm married to Joe Lieberman. Much hilarity has ensued.
If people think that Google is the only advertiser who's profiling people, they're daft. Any and every advertiser with a hint of intelligence studies their target audience and does everything within their power to know them better than they know themselves. Google just has more tools at their disposal than most advertising firms but they all do it.
Even more important than Google's large toolbox is the exceptionally large size of their user base, and the fact that Google knows the email addresses and real names of a large fraction of that base.
Console mmorpgs will likely be quasi fps games in a persistent world. When Sony released the new combat system for SWG the idea was to expand to consoles (or so I read on gaming news sites). It should give you a rough idea of what SOE's ideas were for console mmorpgs a couple years ago. For reference, the new SWG was a horrible embarrassment that finally sealed the coffin on a game that probably should have died awhile before it was introduced.
Then I guess all those benchmarks out there must be wrong. It's all a conspiracy to bury Microsoft's newest product. Yeah... that must be it.
And my first hand experience with Vista... also part of this conspiracy. My mother has a computer that was "built for Vista" (which, by the way, MS has admitted was a "marketing overstatement", ie. LIE). It's slow. It crashes ALOT. We've upgraded drivers. We've done a clean install. We took the necessary updates. It still crashes. It's still slow. It's still a load of crap.
My high-end system costs $4k. It has everything that anyone could want in a system. It can do ray tracing lightning fast but apparently can't load Vista in under 15 minutes, even after spending hours removing all the "sparkle" that is the new UI.
Your experience appears to be derived from a single desktop. I have used multiple desktops, laptops, and notebooks. I have also done research and generally kept up on the happenings in Vista in case there was some mystical transformation from trash-heap to XP-upgrade. I have yet to see it.
I'm glad it works for you, but, you are a minority of a minority and are in no way a benchmark for all Vista installs.
1) Look at recent benchmarks, say from 2008, and they're right and they agree with me (don't compare the dx10 version in Vista to dx9 in XP - compare apples to apples. dx10 seems to largely suck).
2) I have main firsthand experience only with my desktop, and more limited (I use them but they're not mine) experience with a couple of other desktops from work. None have crashed on me, none are slow. Definitely I understand that people with other hardware will have different experiences, but based on what I've heard not on internet forums but from other people who use Vista, the vast majority have zero problems.
3) My high end system cost...well, it's hard to say since I upgrade instead of rebuying everything each time I need a speed boost, but the core system was $600. That doesn't include my hard drives or monitor. Or the case or power supply. I'm using a C2D, so overclocking is easy. I really never felt comfortable with an OC on a computer important to me, but with this generation of CPU I feel safe running a 2.4 GHz chip at 3.2. My load CPU temperature is under 50 C, with a giant but only $30 heat sink, and as I've said, I've had zero crashes in Vista. My computer takes 25 seconds to go from the end of the BIOS checks to a login prompt. There's absolutely no way it should take 15 minutes for any OS to load for you. The delay is definitely not about the normal load of the OS - you have a major hardware or driver problem, which should be easy to find and fix. Log the boot process and see what's stalling for 14 minutes 30 seconds. That's the problem.
4) I don't recommend Vista for my friends. I'll tell them it's working for me, but I don't want to be the reason they spend $80 on an OS and then find that it's got some problem with some part of their system. It's unlikely, but it would be terrible if it happened. I don't want to inflict 15 minute boot times on anyone.
It also gives me access to 4 gigs of ram with zero driver problems, unlike XP64, and the general OS responsiveness is improved over XP.
How did you manage to accomplish this? Vista only shows 3 and a little bit gigs of RAM, even though my BIOS sees 4. Any help would be appreciated.
You're using Vista 32, I'm using 64. I suggest that you switch, though you might look up any very old piece of hardware you have first to make sure it has drivers. I have yet to find something I can't do or use in 64, but my machine has nothing older than 6 years in it. XP32 also only lets you use 3 gigs of your ram (though older versions at least lied and showed all 4), while XP64 lets you use all 4 gigs. Unfortunately, XP64 is much shakier and less supported than Vista64.
Your same Vista key will work if you want to install the 64 bit version. You can request a 64 bit disk from MS for the cost of shipping (or so I hear), or you can just borrow or download a copy and then use your key to do a fully legal installation.
Some of you may remember the Presidential debate only 6 days ago. As soon as I saw this story, I recalled McCain's argument for lowering business taxes. He used a very specific example...Ireland.
You can see the video here with the Ireland remark highlighted.
I took the liberty of transcribing McCain's words. Not to go totally partisan up in here....but you gotta give him props for calling this one:
The business tax. Right now, United States of America business pays the second highest business taxes in the world, 35%. Ireland pays 11%. Now, if you're a business person, and you can locate any place in the world, then obviously if you go to the country where it's 11% tax versus 35, you'll be able to create jobs, increase your business, make more investment, etc. I want to cut that business tax. I want to cut it so that businesses remain in America and create jobs.
It's not like he made an impressive prediction. As even the summary points out, businesses moving to Ireland is (very) old hat, and well known.
There does seem to be a bipartisan blindness to actually solving this problem. In addition to taxes sending businesses out of the US, low wages do as well. A good PhD scientist in China I know makes $7000/year and so do his peers. How do we compete with that? I'm open to suggestions, but all I see from major parties in the US is a whole lot of nothing.
PC exclusive...
I was going to write a well-written retort full of reason and fact, but I decided that it was a waste of time. Instead: *expletive* *expletive* *expletive*.
Moving on.
The people I've heard not complain about Vista use their computers as document editors and web-browsers. However, I have to remind you: my pocket watch can do this, and it costs less than a single install of Vista. To butcher an old phrase: Vista is about as useful as a tit on a bull, and about twice as ugly.
I declare your post to be silly fiction based on a lack of experience. There's nothing I did I XP that doesn't work in Vista. My Vista machine exists primarily because of gaming. My framerates using the same graphical options as in XP are the same as they were in XP, and that's normal and well documented - Vista stopped being slower for gaming long ago, and long before I was willing to install it. It also gives me access to 4 gigs of ram with zero driver problems, unlike XP64, and the general OS responsiveness is improved over XP. It about half a second to load Firefox for the first time after I boot, compared to a few seconds in XP. The same sort of improvement shows up in most apps, though Photoshop only loads at the same speed as it did on XP. Particularly nice is that Vista, while starting out (after a few days of superfetch) faster than XP, continues to extend its lead as time goes on. It seems to be immune from the general slowdown that affects so many XP installs.
Have you tasted it in a blind taste test? Or are you, like most if not all "wine snobs," simply fooling yourself into thinking expensive==good?
Yes, once a week for a year at Best Cellars in Manhattan, and then a little less often but for a few years at a place in Berkeley. Sometimes the cheap wine is good. Sometimes it is bad. Most wines that are reliably quite good (imo) are >$15 a bottle. If you drink much wine and care about the aspects of flavor that I do, you can very easily tell between different qualities. Also, it's not an effort to do so. I drink bad wine and I want to spit it out. I drink good wine and I like it. I drink great wine and have trouble stopping (another problem entirely). I'm sure tons of people want to know a lot about wine and think expensive stuff is good. I'm sure people who like certain types of wine (maybe dry whites) that I don't like have less of a powerful and obvious difference between good and bad within that genre than I do with favorite reds. However, I feel like your post is trying to say "they're all the same, the only difference is price," and that's absolutely not true. Quality of wine varies immensely, and there is a moderate price correlation through $50, at least.
And two buck Chuck isn't going to become Navarro through any amount of aging.
I've heard conflicting stories about those (real) pirates. Some say they are protecting their waters that were being over fished by foreigners, CNN of course just says that they are after it for the money.
Well, they attack transport ships, and when they get a microphone their demands are for money, not less fishing. So...
It's not so bad...my phone's screen is only 640x480, and a 640x480 image looks nice on it. I imagine most DS photos will be viewed on a similarly small device...say, a DS.
As a graduate student in physics, I have never seen a serious researcher use excel for data analysis.
Nor for that matter, is it common to see a scientist using windows for the OS--all linux and mac OS.
This is akin to writing a book about publishing scientific papers with office. Instead, learn LaTex...
The only group of people who use excel for large data analysis are financial types and MBAs. Need I remind you how that turned out?
Oh, so that's why at APS meetings I've seen maybe 5 presentations, ever (out of at the very least 500) given on something other than Windows (Ubuntu once, MacOS the other few times), despite the fact that nearly every speaker uses his or her own laptop for the presentation. Wait...my data seems to indicate that physicists hardly ever use Mac or Linux at all!
If we're just talking about computers controlling instruments, then I see about 90% Windows, 10% Linux if the instrument costs less than a million dollars, and 90% Linux, 10% Windows if it costs more than a million (and there's a transition zone in there somewhere, but my experience is mostly with $100k and $100MM equipment). CERN, for instance, is mostly controlled by non-Windows, but a lot of the laptops lying around there, presumably because people are going to do analysis on them, are Windows. Argonne is a healthy mix of Linux for controls and Windows for analysis. At MIT and Princeton, a couple professors use a Mac, a couple use Linux, most use Windows for personal use. Nearly everyone running stat mech simulations uses Linux for those, but a lot of those people have a personal Linux box.
I'm not going to say that it's good, but I will say that it's true.
It (be it a 3 million or 3 billion solar mass black hole) has an effect, one that you can easily calculate. The time dilation is almost nonexistent when you go more than a fraction of a percent of a galactic radius away from the black hole.
I sent Feinstein and Boxer letters a few years ago about copyright litigation. I got an email from Boxer's office that said "Thanks for your interest!." I got a personal, well reasoned response from Feinstein. She and I have written back and forth once a month ever since, sometimes with her emailing just to ask what I think about related legislation. For all I know it could be one of her staffers, but every email shows a lot of thought and is signed with her name.
Second-life's attempt to be the world's Metaverse turned out to be just a huge advertising/hacking cluster fuck. Not saying that that Lively won't be a advertising/hacking cluster fuck but at least it sounds it would be more open to programmers, which will allow for more diverse possibilities, so there could be just as much good stuff as bad.
Oh yes, we can always rely on Google to save us from advertising. Kinda funny, since Google is an advertising company.
That's the point of the myth: Apollo granted her the gift of prophesy, then cursed her by making it so nobody would ever believe her predictions.
Mod. Parent. Up.