Re:Not a bad thing.
on
Chrome Vs. IE 8
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
An OS contains more than just a kernel. Usually it contains many daemons working. For example, on my Xubuntu OS, I have 96 programs without counting any major ones (terminal windows, browsers, apache, etc.) All of these daemons are needed to provide a modern operating system experience.
A kernel by nature should be tiny, but an OS should contain tons of functionality.
Whatever happened to the web being called thin clients. That sounds morbidly obese
Having only read the summery, I can assume that this isn't some computer running with 512 MB of RAM, but rather one with 2-3 GB of RAM. And really 270 MB of RAM isn't a significant % of RAM if you are using that much. Now, I could be wrong and it still uses that much with 512 MB of RAM, but really, RAM is no use just doing nothing, a browser should use it effectively.
Just because something takes up more resources doesn't mean it has to be slower. Granted, something that takes less resources usually runs faster, but a good application that makes good use of RAM and CPU power can seem fast.
Horse hockey... FF gets fatter and slower once you start saddling it with extensions
How insane are you that you think that FF won't get bloated when you start adding random features via extensions? Seriously, now if the default FF install contained all the extensions and you had to manually disable them, there could be a problem but with you manually adding them, what did you expect?
But that database would take very long to get new releases put in. And ad-block can be easily changed with an/etc/hosts file without slowing down Firefox.
Things, not just MS, have been getting more porcine as computer capacity has increased.
Explain why, Firefox, Opera and Safari (and any other browser) have been trying to make lighter browsers that are fast and take up less resources. Ok, I'll admit that by not coding everything in assembly like we did in the olden days we lose some performance, and by using interpreted languages such as Python or Java we lose more. But in general, only MS keeps making slower and slower software. Even Apple has started to make a faster OS that's what Snow Leopard is all about.
According to all sources, Chrome isn't made for Linux yet (though I imagine you can still get the source, but good luck getting a decent development environment set up on Xandros without using half your SSD). Also, change to EEEXubuntu, the default Xandros absolutely sucks (I'm typing this right now from EEEXubuntu on my EEE 4 G surf)
But when compared to another major browser (Firefox) I can safely say that the pre-alphas were stable and fast let alone the alphas, release candidates and the final product.
Beta means not for mass release, so it's going to need some polish to speed up and remove debugging symbols or whatever
Then explain why I could (and did for about 3 months till I got tired of updating the thing every day) run Firefox 3 pre-alpha builds with less crashes and faster performance then I could a Firefox 2 normal build?
You mean that a *clean* install of Firefox 3 is slower than a *clean* install of Firefox 2? I call you are lying. Granted if you have 50 extensions running in Firefox 3 and some about:config tweaks that do more harm than good, Firefox 2 might be faster.
Also, what are the specs, OS, etc. Because on all of the machines I have tried (Vista, XP, Linux) Firefox 3 absolutely is faster than Firefox 2.
But why should it be applied to the rest of the game? Then it makes WoW be more of a chore rather than a game. How great would it be to have a long weekend only to be told you have played enough WoW for the week?
I'm not saying that we should go back to the stone age and never have a TV or turn it on. What I was saying was that the average American watches so much TV that if you replace TV with something else they are addicted to it.
I think its funny that a lot of people think that playing a lot of video games suddenly makes you obese. I know some people with metabolisms so high that they can eat a triple cheeseburger for every meal and not do any exercises for a week and still look very, very thin. On the other hand, I know some people that eat only a small (healthy) sandwich for two meals a day, exercise often but still are not incredibly skinny.
For some people at the end of a year playing WoW almost non stop they would weigh 400 pounds, for others they would have hardly gained a pound, it just depends on their body.
It depends on the person. Some people I know have hours of fun playing FPS games, other people can't stand them, but would easily put 4 hours a night into playing the newest Final Fantasy game. That is why we have all types of games rather than all RPGs, or all FPS games or all fighting games.
That's the reward structure: you can play and predictably get rewards.
One can be obsessed with Tolkien or Star Trek, in that the secondary world becomes more important than the real one. Since films, books and television don't offer an ongoing, unclosed reward structure that works to the extent that you put time into the activity, those obsessions don't become addictions.
You just described the US market for any copyrighted work. Of course you play and get rewards, if you played and got nothing people wouldn't play it Blizzard want your monthly dues, so clearly they want you to keep playing it. And guess what authors do the same thing if you are obsessed about *insert book here* that ends in a cliffhanger you will probably buy the next book that comes out in the series and you are rewarded with the ending of the book.
MMORPG's Are addictive. I seen the damage its done. For a majority of people certainly gamers who have learned to control there online time it isnt a problem
Books Are addictive. I seen the damage its done. For a majority of people certainly gamers who have learned to control there reading time it isnt a problem
School is addictive. I seen the damage its done. For a majority of people certainly gamers who have learned to control there studying time it isnt a problem
Notice the pattern? MMORPGs are not addictive. Sure, some people might be obsessed with it, but not addictive.
Most non chemical addictions aren't really addictions but simply obsessive behavior. After a time people get bored, that is why we aren't all playing space invaders on our 2600. Most people who play WoW or any other video game have a goal of some kind, be it to get to the highest level, to have all the greatest weapons and armor, to join a certain guild, etc. Once that goal is met and the player experiences it, usually they don't care much for the game anymore.
So what do you say that being addicted to MMORPGs is like? What do you count as "addicted"? Because I'm sure that you can replace MMORPGs with any other activity (studying, reading, sleeping, work) and count it as an addiction. MMORPGs are no more addictive than any other thing you can do.
Its common nature to switch out one activity for another. Be it more or less healthy. For example people who used to drink or smoke might replace drinking alcohol with drinking a soda and people who smoke might replace that with eating. There are people who stopped watching TV 5 hours a day to take up flying RC airplanes, some who replaced the time reading magazines with reading the bible. It only makes sense to replace one activity for another.
Problem is that people who are hooked on those things have been known to go through withdrawal symptoms and to be unable to stop doing them.
That is still an obsession. If you take away a 3 year old's blanket that they carry with them everywhere you might see the same symptoms. But honestly, (hopefully) no one thinks that a 3 year old is addicted to the blanket. It is simply a habit, or perhaps an obsession. Not an addiction.
Because if video games are addictive then I have a long list of other things that are addictive too
Football
Books
Soccer
TV
School
Etc. Sure, some people obsessively play video games, some people obsessively study schoolwork, some people obsessively read, some people obsessively play sports. Yet I wouldn't call school, reading, nor sports addictive. But I suppose because video games are the new thing to be paranoid about, they are addictive, much as how comic books and rock and roll was going to turn the US into a bunch of Satan worshiping anarchists....
Trying to describe people who watch excessive amounts of TV as addicts just because that's what they do in the evenings doesn't work. Same for Wow players or anyone else. That doesn't mean that addiction doesn't exist - it's real and it's painful to watch people go through it.
So unless you forget to eat and you don't have a job you aren't addicted? In this case MMORPGs are totally not addicting there have been what? 20 documented cases of someone forgetting to eat because of it? And as for a job you could argue that skipping a day of work to do *insert activity here* means that you are addicted to it.
Slashdot Mirror
An OS contains more than just a kernel. Usually it contains many daemons working. For example, on my Xubuntu OS, I have 96 programs without counting any major ones (terminal windows, browsers, apache, etc.) All of these daemons are needed to provide a modern operating system experience.
A kernel by nature should be tiny, but an OS should contain tons of functionality.
Whatever happened to the web being called thin clients. That sounds morbidly obese
Having only read the summery, I can assume that this isn't some computer running with 512 MB of RAM, but rather one with 2-3 GB of RAM. And really 270 MB of RAM isn't a significant % of RAM if you are using that much. Now, I could be wrong and it still uses that much with 512 MB of RAM, but really, RAM is no use just doing nothing, a browser should use it effectively.
Just because something takes up more resources doesn't mean it has to be slower. Granted, something that takes less resources usually runs faster, but a good application that makes good use of RAM and CPU power can seem fast.
It loses in court and EULAs die and the world becomes a happier place.
Horse hockey... FF gets fatter and slower once you start saddling it with extensions
How insane are you that you think that FF won't get bloated when you start adding random features via extensions? Seriously, now if the default FF install contained all the extensions and you had to manually disable them, there could be a problem but with you manually adding them, what did you expect?
But that database would take very long to get new releases put in. And ad-block can be easily changed with an /etc/hosts file without slowing down Firefox.
...And the Firefox beta used very few resources and ran fast. Heck, the Firefox pre alphas used few resources and ran fast.
Things, not just MS, have been getting more porcine as computer capacity has increased.
Explain why, Firefox, Opera and Safari (and any other browser) have been trying to make lighter browsers that are fast and take up less resources. Ok, I'll admit that by not coding everything in assembly like we did in the olden days we lose some performance, and by using interpreted languages such as Python or Java we lose more. But in general, only MS keeps making slower and slower software. Even Apple has started to make a faster OS that's what Snow Leopard is all about.
According to all sources, Chrome isn't made for Linux yet (though I imagine you can still get the source, but good luck getting a decent development environment set up on Xandros without using half your SSD). Also, change to EEEXubuntu, the default Xandros absolutely sucks (I'm typing this right now from EEEXubuntu on my EEE 4 G surf)
But when compared to another major browser (Firefox) I can safely say that the pre-alphas were stable and fast let alone the alphas, release candidates and the final product.
Beta means not for mass release, so it's going to need some polish to speed up and remove debugging symbols or whatever
Then explain why I could (and did for about 3 months till I got tired of updating the thing every day) run Firefox 3 pre-alpha builds with less crashes and faster performance then I could a Firefox 2 normal build?
You mean that a *clean* install of Firefox 3 is slower than a *clean* install of Firefox 2? I call you are lying. Granted if you have 50 extensions running in Firefox 3 and some about:config tweaks that do more harm than good, Firefox 2 might be faster.
Also, what are the specs, OS, etc. Because on all of the machines I have tried (Vista, XP, Linux) Firefox 3 absolutely is faster than Firefox 2.
But why should it be applied to the rest of the game? Then it makes WoW be more of a chore rather than a game. How great would it be to have a long weekend only to be told you have played enough WoW for the week?
I'm not saying that we should go back to the stone age and never have a TV or turn it on. What I was saying was that the average American watches so much TV that if you replace TV with something else they are addicted to it.
I think its funny that a lot of people think that playing a lot of video games suddenly makes you obese. I know some people with metabolisms so high that they can eat a triple cheeseburger for every meal and not do any exercises for a week and still look very, very thin. On the other hand, I know some people that eat only a small (healthy) sandwich for two meals a day, exercise often but still are not incredibly skinny.
For some people at the end of a year playing WoW almost non stop they would weigh 400 pounds, for others they would have hardly gained a pound, it just depends on their body.
It depends on the person. Some people I know have hours of fun playing FPS games, other people can't stand them, but would easily put 4 hours a night into playing the newest Final Fantasy game. That is why we have all types of games rather than all RPGs, or all FPS games or all fighting games.
That's the reward structure: you can play and predictably get rewards. One can be obsessed with Tolkien or Star Trek, in that the secondary world becomes more important than the real one. Since films, books and television don't offer an ongoing, unclosed reward structure that works to the extent that you put time into the activity, those obsessions don't become addictions.
You just described the US market for any copyrighted work. Of course you play and get rewards, if you played and got nothing people wouldn't play it Blizzard want your monthly dues, so clearly they want you to keep playing it. And guess what authors do the same thing if you are obsessed about *insert book here* that ends in a cliffhanger you will probably buy the next book that comes out in the series and you are rewarded with the ending of the book.
MMORPG's Are addictive. I seen the damage its done. For a majority of people certainly gamers who have learned to control there online time it isnt a problem
Books Are addictive. I seen the damage its done. For a majority of people certainly gamers who have learned to control there reading time it isnt a problem
School is addictive. I seen the damage its done. For a majority of people certainly gamers who have learned to control there studying time it isnt a problem
Notice the pattern? MMORPGs are not addictive. Sure, some people might be obsessed with it, but not addictive.
Most non chemical addictions aren't really addictions but simply obsessive behavior. After a time people get bored, that is why we aren't all playing space invaders on our 2600. Most people who play WoW or any other video game have a goal of some kind, be it to get to the highest level, to have all the greatest weapons and armor, to join a certain guild, etc. Once that goal is met and the player experiences it, usually they don't care much for the game anymore.
So what do you say that being addicted to MMORPGs is like? What do you count as "addicted"? Because I'm sure that you can replace MMORPGs with any other activity (studying, reading, sleeping, work) and count it as an addiction. MMORPGs are no more addictive than any other thing you can do.
Its common nature to switch out one activity for another. Be it more or less healthy. For example people who used to drink or smoke might replace drinking alcohol with drinking a soda and people who smoke might replace that with eating. There are people who stopped watching TV 5 hours a day to take up flying RC airplanes, some who replaced the time reading magazines with reading the bible. It only makes sense to replace one activity for another.
Problem is that people who are hooked on those things have been known to go through withdrawal symptoms and to be unable to stop doing them.
That is still an obsession. If you take away a 3 year old's blanket that they carry with them everywhere you might see the same symptoms. But honestly, (hopefully) no one thinks that a 3 year old is addicted to the blanket. It is simply a habit, or perhaps an obsession. Not an addiction.
Haven't you already realized that media (and even geek/Japanese media such as anime) tend to over dramatize things?
So wait, what do you define as addictive?
Because if video games are addictive then I have a long list of other things that are addictive too
Football
Books
Soccer
TV
School
Etc. Sure, some people obsessively play video games, some people obsessively study schoolwork, some people obsessively read, some people obsessively play sports. Yet I wouldn't call school, reading, nor sports addictive. But I suppose because video games are the new thing to be paranoid about, they are addictive, much as how comic books and rock and roll was going to turn the US into a bunch of Satan worshiping anarchists....
Trying to describe people who watch excessive amounts of TV as addicts just because that's what they do in the evenings doesn't work. Same for Wow players or anyone else. That doesn't mean that addiction doesn't exist - it's real and it's painful to watch people go through it.
So unless you forget to eat and you don't have a job you aren't addicted? In this case MMORPGs are totally not addicting there have been what? 20 documented cases of someone forgetting to eat because of it? And as for a job you could argue that skipping a day of work to do *insert activity here* means that you are addicted to it.