I guess the Athlon is not "competitive silicon" either... I mean they trail Intel like what, 300-500Mhz? They must be much slower than the P4, right? No? Well lay off the G4.
George Thorogood and the Destroyers...
on
Browsing Alone
·
· Score: 1
I browse alone....
[da dum da dum da dum]
Yeaaaahhhh with nobody else...
[da dum da dum da dum]
"Zealot" -- more words with religious connotations! Here's a hint from someone over 30, Brighteyes: "Your choice of words say a lot more about you than they do about anyone else."
Go ahead and ask one the adults you know... they'll back me up.
Katz's argument is that hot-shot, cutting-edge companies can learn a lot from sitting around and watching how Microsoft does things.
But he doesn't seem to realize that none of the companies that do cutting-edge-tech have a monopoly to rest on while others do the hard work so they can come gliding in on the trailing edge.
Additionally, if these self-same companies sat and waited to do what Microsoft was doing, nothing would ever happen in the computer industry! It would be an infinite feedback-loop of inactivity! And who would go out of business first in that kind of situation? (See paragraph 2)
Wow... it's not religious for you, but you throw around religiously-charged terms like "bigot" and "faithful;" check the dictionary, dude. And in addition to religion you have injected your own version of pop-psychology to the thread -- I thought this was about an OS?
If you're a teenager, Web designer, film editor or visual arts major, or even a loving Grandma, [ Shuh -- or anyone else, for that matter ] it's great that the iMac allows you to create your own DVDs, organize and edit digital pictures, play CDs or convert MP3's, turn home videotapes into high-quality edited films.
And all for about the same price as a mid-to-high level P.C.! Of course the P.C. would then incur additional expenses to begin to have the same funtionality as the iMac...
What's less clear is whether or not the public -- especially that critical middle-class chunk of it -- wants to do those things on a computer,
"What's less clear is whether or not the public -- especially the critical middle-class chunk of it -- wants a mouse and a GUI and a 32-bit operating system like the Mac!" -- P.C.-apologist circa 1985.
or is confident about its ability to use machinery that's still more complicated and problematic than its makers seem able to admit.
But somehow Microsoft's first few attempts are going to be on-par... or "better" than what Apple has now: see Windows 1.0, Windows 2.0, Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1, etc.
For nearly a generation now, from Jobs to the makers of instant replay TV machines, some of the best minds in the tech world -- usually the younger ones -- have been crippled and misled by the confusion between what's cool and what's going to be successful, between what's neat and what's necessary.
For nearly a generation now, some of the most mediocre minds in the tech world -- usually the older ones -- have been crippled and misled by Microsoft marketting: "What's cool, neat, useful, robust, and availble now is not necessary... wait and test our beta-version copy of this, besides we know all the secret Windows API's!"
The survivors of the Net's first generation -- brilliant plodders like Gates and Steve Case -- understand quite well that they aren't the same thing, and have, as a result, increasingly come to dominate the Net.
Ha! Calling Gates a "survivor" of the Net's first generation is like calling Saddam Hussein the survivor of his own first wave of Kurdish/ethnic cleansing! The only thing Microsoft understands is this:
Have apologists seek out and declare a great party "not ready," "half-baked," "not-necessary," and "only for geeks."
Start making a half-ass version of the same party down the street.
Show up very late to the first party.
Crash the party.
Herd the party-goers to your own weak bash (weak drinks, screwed up second-hand theme, boorish friends of people from first party) and then start advertising all over town for it.
Don't worry about this being "fair," after all, why bother having monopoly power if you can't leverage it to drive anyone else out of business?
Yeah... but Apple better get its iPod out there cheaper because it's only a matter of time before USB-mp3-player buyers realize the USB connection technology is too slow for 6Gb and now 20Gb drives. When that happens, will they pay $400 for the *only* IEEE-1394 version? Hell no.
They will wait around for the USB2 versions to come out in a year and then buy them by the gazillions -- thereby marginalizing IEEE-1394 and helping that bus technology bust into wide acceptance. This in turn will be the springboard USB2 would need to make a stab at the already-established IEEE-1394-based DV camera/editing market.
I guess the writing is on the wall. After years of crowing about open architectures and such, M$-lovers see their beloved company move into the biggest chunk of P.C.-gaming with their own PROPRIETARY BOX! Of course Linux-users are all too familiar by now with the fact that many P.C. components are designed with proprietary-only Windows API's in mind... essentially closing the door on the "open architecture" holy grail. Might as well buy a Mac for computing (no M$-crap) and an XBox for games and be done with it!
90% of the people here don't even know what evil is or say they don't because it's of Satan. On top of that everyone will say that it's evil just because it's of Satan. If you want to form your own opinion and not listen to a bunch of angry children then maybe you should go buy one of the many $8 magazines that have the Beta DVD and try it out for yourself. I've been using Java for the last few years and I've tried evil and I like alot of the stuff it has to offer. If you REALLY want to know make your own opinion. We all know what the Linux Community is going to say anyways.
"Real world experience" be damned, these kids know what's going to net them the most money and job security -- the crappiest and most ubiquitous OS known to man. "All hail Gates, for whom we are about to kludge!"
Someone asked earlier why Apple isn't getting Quicktime onto DVD's along with.WMA and.WMV... well the reason is because Apples already read/write/author DVD's in their native format AND Microsoft is using this as a *BIG* power-grab in the *FUTURE* of DVD -- with the Digital Rights Management nexus running straight into Microsloth.
I expect this means that people will be able to burn CD-Rs with WMA and WMV format media and play them on their DVD player. From where I'm standing, that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
Spoken just like the poor sap who is about to smell the fact he is standing in dog doo in about 2 minutes.
One wonders why Apple wasn't jumping right into this kind of thing to make sure QuickTime was playable there, too...
Here's where the "doo" comes in... Windows made this deal because they are hand-in-hand with content creators who want stricter Digital Rights Management schemes in playback. How? Why with.WMA and.WMV, of course! Try a google search and see about people who went.mp3->.wma and lost the "right" to listen to their own music. Sorry to be the one to let you in on this, but yer digital ass is about to be grass.
I always thought it funny, hilarious even, that Sun users bash one monopoly (MS) and jump into another (Sun). Open-standards hardware forever! And I run a open-standard OS, too.
(Running a Sun with Linux is just as bad as running a PC with Windows.)
So basically it's not that big of a deal. I'm not familiar enough with NT/2000/XP to know how it works yet, but it's fairly easy to do in 98. Just some ways I described above are more time-consuming than others.
Wow! Now that was a very interesting screed on the Registry! Mind if I use it on my "Why Macintosh?" site?;c)
Probably you failed to consider Cygnus tools like bash when you said that Windows can't have a good one.
On the Macintosh (and on other UNIX-based boxes) "bash" is something called a "shell" -- not a tool. There are many of them out there, zsh, ksh, and csh are others. I can install any one I want from the world of BSD-UNIX. Have fun with whatever "Cygnus" deems fit to grace your Windows box with.
Pfft. You really don't know what you're talking about. It does not take 6 minutes to boot from a CD or a Zip, more like 1 or 2.
No option for a short-cut - because Apple always know what's best for you. More like: the OS is not based on one DOS-kludge after another and so there isn't a crippled 1970's-style OS to drop into.
Probably this is a major contributing factor to the lack of a games market (and hence the platform's relative obscurity) - the resources of the system are always crippled by a complete MacOS.
I guess when your entire platform gained dominance largely on the strength of DOS-based games, this is a "reasonable" statement. Unfortunately, you need to stay current on your events... MacOS X allows me to load up just a UNIX CLI without starting the GUI... can Windows do that? Nope -- just DOS and crippled faux-VMS.
Conclusion? A 500mhz G3 is never within spitting distance of a 1Ghz P3/K7.
I wouldn't be too sure of that. I had a processor-intensive PERL script I used on a project. It tried permutations of 8 items taken 8 at a time. It was not cache/disk/memory bound because it was quite small.
On my 1997-vintage G3-233Mhz running LinuxPPC, it finished in 1min45s. Just for grins, I sent the script to myself at work and ran it on my new 2000-vintage $X0,000 DUAL-P3-866Mhz workstation running Red Hat. It finished in 55s. Not even twice the performance on nearly 4X the Mhz... 7X if you count both processors (and no, I couldn't tell if the second one kicked in for my little script). Everything on the PC was 3-4 years newer than the Mac, and Red Hat is more advanced on the PC than LinuxPPC is on the Mac.
Long story short: I wouldn't be surprised at all if a 500Mhz G3 kept up with a 1000Mhz P3 or K7 for any number of things other than the find-replace function in M$ Word.
I guess so... moved on to booting from a 1.4Mb floppy into a DOS-based "save-my-ass" mode. When a Mac boots from a CD (or even a 100Mb Zip) you get the real-deal MacOS.
Slashdot Mirror
Every time I walk by a Windows lab, you should see the "CLUSTER" they have going on in there! ;c)
"Where do you want to go today?" Pffft. As if it mattered...
I guess the Athlon is not "competitive silicon" either... I mean they trail Intel like what, 300-500Mhz? They must be much slower than the P4, right? No? Well lay off the G4.
I browse alone.... [da dum da dum da dum] Yeaaaahhhh with nobody else... [da dum da dum da dum]
"Zealot" -- more words with religious connotations! Here's a hint from someone over 30, Brighteyes: "Your choice of words say a lot more about you than they do about anyone else."
Go ahead and ask one the adults you know... they'll back me up.
Katz's argument is that hot-shot, cutting-edge companies can learn a lot from sitting around and watching how Microsoft does things.
But he doesn't seem to realize that none of the companies that do cutting-edge-tech have a monopoly to rest on while others do the hard work so they can come gliding in on the trailing edge.
Additionally, if these self-same companies sat and waited to do what Microsoft was doing, nothing would ever happen in the computer industry! It would be an infinite feedback-loop of inactivity! And who would go out of business first in that kind of situation? (See paragraph 2)
Wow... it's not religious for you, but you throw around religiously-charged terms like "bigot" and "faithful;" check the dictionary, dude. And in addition to religion you have injected your own version of pop-psychology to the thread -- I thought this was about an OS?
"The point is that OS X is the first one of the 10 that can be called reliable. You Mac bigots make me ill."
Yeah, must be tearing you up inside that Windows hasn't gotten to its first reliable OS yet...
And all for about the same price as a mid-to-high level P.C.! Of course the P.C. would then incur additional expenses to begin to have the same funtionality as the iMac...
What's less clear is whether or not the public -- especially that critical middle-class chunk of it -- wants to do those things on a computer,
"What's less clear is whether or not the public -- especially the critical middle-class chunk of it -- wants a mouse and a GUI and a 32-bit operating system like the Mac!" -- P.C.-apologist circa 1985.
or is confident about its ability to use machinery that's still more complicated and problematic than its makers seem able to admit.
But somehow Microsoft's first few attempts are going to be on-par... or "better" than what Apple has now: see Windows 1.0, Windows 2.0, Windows 3.0, Windows 3.1, etc.
For nearly a generation now, from Jobs to the makers of instant replay TV machines, some of the best minds in the tech world -- usually the younger ones -- have been crippled and misled by the confusion between what's cool and what's going to be successful, between what's neat and what's necessary.
For nearly a generation now, some of the most mediocre minds in the tech world -- usually the older ones -- have been crippled and misled by Microsoft marketting: "What's cool, neat, useful, robust, and availble now is not necessary... wait and test our beta-version copy of this, besides we know all the secret Windows API's!"
The survivors of the Net's first generation -- brilliant plodders like Gates and Steve Case -- understand quite well that they aren't the same thing, and have, as a result, increasingly come to dominate the Net.
Ha! Calling Gates a "survivor" of the Net's first generation is like calling Saddam Hussein the survivor of his own first wave of Kurdish/ethnic cleansing! The only thing Microsoft understands is this:
Yeah... but Apple better get its iPod out there cheaper because it's only a matter of time before USB-mp3-player buyers realize the USB connection technology is too slow for 6Gb and now 20Gb drives. When that happens, will they pay $400 for the *only* IEEE-1394 version? Hell no. They will wait around for the USB2 versions to come out in a year and then buy them by the gazillions -- thereby marginalizing IEEE-1394 and helping that bus technology bust into wide acceptance. This in turn will be the springboard USB2 would need to make a stab at the already-established IEEE-1394-based DV camera/editing market.
I guess the writing is on the wall. After years of crowing about open architectures and such, M$-lovers see their beloved company move into the biggest chunk of P.C.-gaming with their own PROPRIETARY BOX! Of course Linux-users are all too familiar by now with the fact that many P.C. components are designed with proprietary-only Windows API's in mind... essentially closing the door on the "open architecture" holy grail. Might as well buy a Mac for computing (no M$-crap) and an XBox for games and be done with it!
90% of the people here don't even know what evil is or say they don't because it's of Satan. On top of that everyone will say that it's evil just because it's of Satan. If you want to form your own opinion and not listen to a bunch of angry children then maybe you should go buy one of the many $8 magazines that have the Beta DVD and try it out for yourself. I've been using Java for the last few years and I've tried evil and I like alot of the stuff it has to offer. If you REALLY want to know make your own opinion. We all know what the Linux Community is going to say anyways.
Now the only question remain is: "Head or hand?"
"Real world experience" be damned, these kids know what's going to net them the most money and job security -- the crappiest and most ubiquitous OS known to man. "All hail Gates, for whom we are about to kludge!"
Someone asked earlier why Apple isn't getting Quicktime onto DVD's along with .WMA and .WMV... well the reason is because Apples already read/write/author DVD's in their native format AND Microsoft is using this as a *BIG* power-grab in the *FUTURE* of DVD -- with the Digital Rights Management nexus running straight into Microsloth.
I expect this means that people will be able to burn CD-Rs with WMA and WMV format media and play them on their DVD player. From where I'm standing, that's a good thing, not a bad thing.
.WMA and .WMV, of course! Try a google search and see about people who went .mp3->.wma and lost the "right" to listen to their own music. Sorry to be the one to let you in on this, but yer digital ass is about to be grass.
Spoken just like the poor sap who is about to smell the fact he is standing in dog doo in about 2 minutes.
One wonders why Apple wasn't jumping right into this kind of thing to make sure QuickTime was playable there, too...
Here's where the "doo" comes in... Windows made this deal because they are hand-in-hand with content creators who want stricter Digital Rights Management schemes in playback. How? Why with
Shut me down!
Whoa! Shut me down!
I always stop...
always stop...
always always always stop...
Yuh made some grown men cri-e-y!
Yuh made some grown men cri-e-y!
Now restart, now registry...
It's a wonder it could ever -- ever -- beeeeeeee!
( Ahhhh... the end of an era of Microsoft-inspired angst... and the beginning of a new one...)
I always thought it funny, hilarious even, that Sun users bash one monopoly (MS) and jump into another (Sun). Open-standards hardware forever! And I run a open-standard OS, too. (Running a Sun with Linux is just as bad as running a PC with Windows.)
So basically it's not that big of a deal. I'm not familiar enough with NT/2000/XP to know how it works yet, but it's fairly easy to do in 98. Just some ways I described above are more time-consuming than others.
;c)
Wow! Now that was a very interesting screed on the Registry! Mind if I use it on my "Why Macintosh?" site?
Probably you failed to consider Cygnus tools like bash when you said that Windows can't have a good one.
On the Macintosh (and on other UNIX-based boxes) "bash" is something called a "shell" -- not a tool. There are many of them out there, zsh, ksh, and csh are others. I can install any one I want from the world of BSD-UNIX. Have fun with whatever "Cygnus" deems fit to grace your Windows box with.
And it always takes around six minutes.
Pfft. You really don't know what you're talking about. It does not take 6 minutes to boot from a CD or a Zip, more like 1 or 2.
No option for a short-cut - because Apple always know what's best for you. More like: the OS is not based on one DOS-kludge after another and so there isn't a crippled 1970's-style OS to drop into.
Probably this is a major contributing factor to the lack of a games market (and hence the platform's relative obscurity) - the resources of the system are always crippled by a complete MacOS.
I guess when your entire platform gained dominance largely on the strength of DOS-based games, this is a "reasonable" statement. Unfortunately, you need to stay current on your events... MacOS X allows me to load up just a UNIX CLI without starting the GUI... can Windows do that? Nope -- just DOS and crippled faux-VMS.
Apple, with its desire to control the hardware *and* the software, is much more "monopolistic" than Microsoft ever was.
Yeah, I guess Sun, SGI, HPUX, & IBM AIX machines are much more "monopolistic" in this respect than Microsoft too... methinks not.
It's just that Steve Jobs made an inferior product, and the market made its choice.
s/Steve Jobs/Bill Gates/g -- s/market/Microsoft/g -- s/its/DOS-users'/g
Conclusion? A 500mhz G3 is never within spitting distance of a 1Ghz P3/K7.
I wouldn't be too sure of that. I had a processor-intensive PERL script I used on a project. It tried permutations of 8 items taken 8 at a time. It was not cache/disk/memory bound because it was quite small.
On my 1997-vintage G3-233Mhz running LinuxPPC, it finished in 1min45s. Just for grins, I sent the script to myself at work and ran it on my new 2000-vintage $X0,000 DUAL-P3-866Mhz workstation running Red Hat. It finished in 55s. Not even twice the performance on nearly 4X the Mhz... 7X if you count both processors (and no, I couldn't tell if the second one kicked in for my little script). Everything on the PC was 3-4 years newer than the Mac, and Red Hat is more advanced on the PC than LinuxPPC is on the Mac.
Long story short: I wouldn't be surprised at all if a 500Mhz G3 kept up with a 1000Mhz P3 or K7 for any number of things other than the find-replace function in M$ Word.
If those prices at least included a 15" monitor...then I'd be a MAC bitch right now.
;c)
Is this close enough? You might want to do some dress-shopping...
Heh... the difference is that Windows moved on.
I guess so... moved on to booting from a 1.4Mb floppy into a DOS-based "save-my-ass" mode. When a Mac boots from a CD (or even a 100Mb Zip) you get the real-deal MacOS.