My biggest problem with SP2 is that it is incompatible with the Cisco VPN Client. I need to use that to work from home or the road, and as such it was impossible for me to do work when I installed SP2RC1. Until Microsoft and Cisco work that out, I don't think many of the laptops and tablets at my workplace will get this update.
They also wanted to improve on what the rest of the world was using. It was a consideration for them to be able to say "Look how advanced we are! We're compatible with the rest of the world, but better." If they used IPv3, people would look at it, rightly or not, as a failure.
He clearly meant "Don't pretend to know what you don't know." Which is obvious to everyone not hellbent on being an ass.
And I'm sure the developers at Microsoft aren't stupid; they're hired because they're not stuped, as a matter of fact. They would not make the same mistake you claim you would.
This, I think, is a poor attitude for an educated consumer. You have every right to demand the most for your money. In addition, a company should want you to continue buying things from them. As such, it is to the companies benefit to value your business even after the transaction. Too many people don't expect this, and it leads to far worse products as a result.
And that's exactly why it's NOT A GIFT to the producers. You are choosing to purchase the better product because it is better and will be more likely to satisfy your needs. I said it's not a gift. You're getting more out of the deal, thus it is not a gift.
And if you like Apple products, you should buy them. You should buy them because they help you do your work better and faster, because they keep you safe from the dangers of the internet, or because you just want one. But you should never consider that a gift. You are getting a product you value at least as much as the money.
I don't own an XBOX, and am not likely to pick up an XBOX Next
Why should I give Microsoft my money then, if they won't value what I have given them? Hmmm. You haven't given them anything. You don't even have an Xbox, so how can you accuse MS of trying to screw you out of being able to play the old games? Do you buy the games without the console? And even if you DID have an Xbox, you haven't GIVEN them anything. They produced a product and you purchased it. They didn't give you anything, you didn't give them anything. It was a transaction. You are not entitled to treat your purchases as gifts to the producers.
I'm just sick and tired of hearing all these people who whine about how the Xbox2 will suck so bad and that there is no way in hell they'll buy it if it isn't backwards compatible with something they also refused to buy!!
I wouldn't try to claim that it is impossible for SkoleLinux to take off. Look at it this way. It does not require you to remove the operating system currently on the computers on your network. Set up a few thin client servers, have all the machines that are currently running Windows boot over the network, and you have the SkoleLinux setup all up and ready for use. And you still have Windows installed just in case you don't like it for some reason. In this case, switching to a new operating system is as easy as rebooting.
Studios which focus on cross-platform titles, as many of the largest publishers in the world do, face a gigantic problem - while developing a title on PS2, Xbox and GameCube is an easy prospect as code, art and audio can be effectively reused on all three platforms, adding a next-generation platform to the mix will require complete re-development.
What the buzzing? Code, art, and audio can all be shared across the current generation, but not into the next? Code cannot be shared between the Xbox, the PS2 and the GC. They are completely different platforms, with completely different architectures. Any code you can share between them is algorithmic code that can easily be shared with any next-gen system. Art? If you can share art between current systems, why couldn't you do it between a current system and a new system? It may not be everything the new system is capable of displaying, but these consoles don't exactly choke on images that are too easy. (And if the art is designed from the start to be displayed on the Xbox2, then they've already spent the money developing for that system, and it is a trivial process of dumbing it down for lesser machines.) And audio? AUDIO? It's exactly the same. All of it. No difference. There will be no problem here, at all.
I don't think it's a good idea for Microsoft to try to be the first to market in the next generation, but this chap is a raving lunatic. That point is completely invalid, as anyone who's ever even USED a computer or a console before ought to know better than this.
Since then, those formerly communist nations have privatized resources formerly owned by their governments, with remarkable results. Estonia is Europe's new economic wonder: revenue from state-owned property is a smaller percentage of the economy than it is in the United States, and its economy is growing more than twice as fast as ours.
If I wanted to destroy my credibility, I would conclude my article with this paragraph. Apparently, that's exactly what he wanted to do... The US economy is the strongest in the world; its percentage of revenue from state-owned property has something to do with that (you need some... as in, a balance). Of course the Estonian economy is growing faster than the economy of the US. It's starting from ZERO! If the economy of Estonia were growing at the same rate as the US economy, they would be bad times indeed over there. Especially considering the fact that the US is currently fighting out of an economic recession. (Which, if you can imagine, is not good for the "economic growth" statistic.)
Basically, all of his points seemed dubious, but ending with this one shows that he deserves little to no credibility, and we should all expect, nay, hope, that the FCC will stick around to protect us from the large corporations for some time to come.
Um, that's actually a totally false "translation." In fact, it's pretty close to the opposite of what I said. If you don't like any of Apple's products just because they are Apple, then why do you bother posting/reading this section of the site, and why do you think you're entitled to criticize "fanatics" when you yourself are the primary guilty party? If you don't like the product because it doesn't do what you want it to do, then don't buy it. You can criticize it, sure, but I think it's clear (from the rest of this discussion, and even *gasp* some creative thinking about the possibilities) that this device does more things than any other competing product. It's cheap, but it does more things.
The great-grandparent post accused this device of not being good enough because the audio quality was sub-par. Apparently, he is such a brilliant audiophile that he thinks it's *possible* to transmit full quality audio wirelessly and to offer full quality hi-fi equipment for $130. I think we can all agree that Apple realizes the niche they are aiming at with this product, and it is definitely possible that they decided to release this because it's going to turn out to be a huge niche that is utterly unfilled.
The problem is that you guys are misunderstanding the aim of this device, perhaps because of the logo (which is regrettable), and giving it undue and foolish criticism, regardless of the logo. ***Don't say anything positive about an Apple product. Just admit that you've drunk the kool-aid AND be flamed!***
Actually that's exactly what happened with Godzilla. They made the movie, and realized that it totally sucked. Understanding that it would lose over 75% of its ticket sales from the first week to the second week as people came home and told their friends that it sucked, they hyped it more than anything and got it playing in every theater in the country. Result: huge first week, no sales afterwards. Analysis: successful movie, money-wise.
Why would you want to gamble on the movie when you could know if it's worth it? And if you want to think of it as a gamble, would you rather trust a 20 second commercial to tell you if it's good, or your friend coming over and saying "We're going to see this movie." "Why?" "I've seen it. It rocks. Now let's go." ?
And that's why the studios don't want people to be allowed to use text messaging in theaters. They fear that kids will text message their friends and tell them not to come to the movie. Obviously, they are overlooking the fact that kids will talk to their friends over the phone or in person and tell them if the movie isn't worth it, but the fact that that fear exists says something about the studios' motivation.
Because it's not wireless. If the iPod had wi-fi, then you could change the songs playing on your stereo by clicking "Next" on the iPod in your pocket while you're not even looking at the stereo. Thus, completely different solutions to the problem, one of which is ridiculously easier and cooler. I'll let you guess which.
If it's not good enough for you and doesn't do what you need, don't buy it. Buy something that does. If there isn't anything else that quite does what you need, why are you bitching about Apple not providing all your products for you, especially since you probably would never buy any of their products? How you got modded up, I don't know, but Apple didn't release this saying "This is the best Hi-Fi device ever, and it plays perfect sound and it does everything you'll ever need!!! Insanely great!" Instead, they said "This will let you play music off your stereo instead of your laptop speakers without plugging it in. This will extend your wireless network's range. This will act as a wireless print server for all the computers in your house. It's easy! And cheap!" It's not a fucking high fidelity audio appliance, you tit, it's designed to make things easy and better than they would be if you were playing MP3s off your computer. And that's what it fucking does.
And no, I'm not some fanatic Apple apologist. I just dislike assholes. They make me have to yell.
Statistics would of course be difficult to compile for this. I can, however, give a personal account.
I used to download movies off the internet, and a lot of them certainly were of the CAM variety. I had my TV hooked up to my computer, and could watch movies whenever I wanted to from the comfort of my couch. When I found a new release that I genuinely liked, I would tell my friends that it's good and we'd all go see it in the theater. If a movie sucked, I would tell the group and we would avoid it when we went to the theater. So, basically, movie piracy does not inherently make ticket sales go up or down. If a movie is good, pirates will be more likely to go to the theater to see it, and bring their friends. If a movie sucks, then the pirates know it and can't be tricked. Ultimately, if the studios think that piracy is hurting ticket sales that much, it may well be because people always know which movies suck, and how much, and don't bother wasting all their money and time watching it at the theater.
I stopped downloading movies because so many movies started to suck so badly that I couldn't even justify the couple hundred MB per movie on my hard drive or the 2 hours on my couch to bother with it any more. And after doing that for a couple of years, I became able to predict which movies would be good based on the trailers pretty accurately, so it lost its necessity.
Especially since the Xbox Next will be running XNA, the next generation version of DirectX, which will also be used on the PC platform for the same purpose. Essentially, games companies will be able to write one game, and with very little glue code can get it to run on both the PC and the Xbox2. And they'll be network compatible, so you can use your PC to play online against someone with their Xbox2 (at least according to the article). There will probably be very few Xbox2 exclusive titles, and it will have nothing to do with the technology. If you can write an Xbox2 game, you can run it on a PC.
A private venture may well be much more concerned about fuel efficiency. After all, that's one of the major complaints about NASA: they spend too much money. Private companies would not be interested in wasting nearly as much money. And while it probably costs more to produce better rocket fuel (there are also ways to prevent this), it costs a hell of a lot more to lose a payload on account of bad fuel. I'm sure space-faring companies would be able to recognize this.
It (the machine) is not really "running" the operating system if you have to emulate it (using MOL, which stands for Mac On Linux). The machine is *running* linux, which in turn is *running* OS X. The machine itself is not technically running OS X. It uses OpenFirmware, but there is a proprietary Mac ROM which is required for the machine to be able to (directly) run OS X. This is why the homebrew PPC machine from Yellow Dog cannot have OS X installed, only linux.
There are also people who use iTunes and iTMS and own iPods, but don't use a Mac. Like me. iTunes and iTMS are software products that work on Windows. The iPod works on Windows. I makes sense, logically, that the iPod division would be the one that would interface with Windows machines, and they are separating that from the Mac division so that there is no conflict of interest of any kind.
Idiot. Mac OS X may *RUN* on the AmigaOne, but it will not *BOOT*. You can run it through linux, via MOL, but it will not boot by itself without the ROM. This has been the case for... forever.
But that's not even a problem. OpenOffice.org does that just fine. The problems with the linux desktop lie in the fact that the desktop environments are subpar. "Cite"* all the reasons you please that the problem is with Office, that's not a real problem. This is.
Well that was an idiotic comment. Microsoft FORCED Dell into a certain OEM agreement whereby they could only sell Windows at the price they were getting if they agreed not to give anyone the option. Microsoft FORCED Dell. Dell FORCED you. Hence, Microsoft FORCED you to pay for Windows. Otherwise, you don't get the product you want.
if some other company came along and implemented a ppc chip that implemented the same instruction set as the g3-g5 chips and used hardware components (ethernet, video, sound) that are compatible with os x's drivers and implement the openfirmware STANDARD then it will run os x.
That's not actually true. It won't run OS X unless the board has the proper Mac ROM that can only be had from Apple that allows MacOS to run on a particular machine. OS X will not run without this ROM chip.
Also, when Petrley complains that you need to edit GConf to change the default behavior, instead of finding a prominent checkbox, Jorge (a) lists 3 ways to change the current behavior
That's interesting, because it is, by definition, impossible to change the DEFAULT behavior. That's the point of making it default. It's always the same on installation. You can change the CURRENT behavior away from the default, but you cannot change the default itself. And that is what Petreley does not understand, but Jorge does.
Slashdot Mirror
My biggest problem with SP2 is that it is incompatible with the Cisco VPN Client. I need to use that to work from home or the road, and as such it was impossible for me to do work when I installed SP2RC1. Until Microsoft and Cisco work that out, I don't think many of the laptops and tablets at my workplace will get this update.
They also wanted to improve on what the rest of the world was using. It was a consideration for them to be able to say "Look how advanced we are! We're compatible with the rest of the world, but better." If they used IPv3, people would look at it, rightly or not, as a failure.
He clearly meant "Don't pretend to know what you don't know." Which is obvious to everyone not hellbent on being an ass.
And I'm sure the developers at Microsoft aren't stupid; they're hired because they're not stuped, as a matter of fact. They would not make the same mistake you claim you would.
This, I think, is a poor attitude for an educated consumer. You have every right to demand the most for your money. In addition, a company should want you to continue buying things from them. As such, it is to the companies benefit to value your business even after the transaction. Too many people don't expect this, and it leads to far worse products as a result.
And that's exactly why it's NOT A GIFT to the producers. You are choosing to purchase the better product because it is better and will be more likely to satisfy your needs. I said it's not a gift. You're getting more out of the deal, thus it is not a gift.
And if you like Apple products, you should buy them. You should buy them because they help you do your work better and faster, because they keep you safe from the dangers of the internet, or because you just want one. But you should never consider that a gift. You are getting a product you value at least as much as the money.
I don't own an XBOX, and am not likely to pick up an XBOX Next
Why should I give Microsoft my money then, if they won't value what I have given them?
Hmmm. You haven't given them anything. You don't even have an Xbox, so how can you accuse MS of trying to screw you out of being able to play the old games? Do you buy the games without the console? And even if you DID have an Xbox, you haven't GIVEN them anything. They produced a product and you purchased it. They didn't give you anything, you didn't give them anything. It was a transaction. You are not entitled to treat your purchases as gifts to the producers.
I'm just sick and tired of hearing all these people who whine about how the Xbox2 will suck so bad and that there is no way in hell they'll buy it if it isn't backwards compatible with something they also refused to buy!!
In Soviet Russia, Xbox's market share is YOU!
Um, yes.
I wouldn't try to claim that it is impossible for SkoleLinux to take off. Look at it this way. It does not require you to remove the operating system currently on the computers on your network. Set up a few thin client servers, have all the machines that are currently running Windows boot over the network, and you have the SkoleLinux setup all up and ready for use. And you still have Windows installed just in case you don't like it for some reason. In this case, switching to a new operating system is as easy as rebooting.
Studios which focus on cross-platform titles, as many of the largest publishers in the world do, face a gigantic problem - while developing a title on PS2, Xbox and GameCube is an easy prospect as code, art and audio can be effectively reused on all three platforms, adding a next-generation platform to the mix will require complete re-development.
What the buzzing? Code, art, and audio can all be shared across the current generation, but not into the next? Code cannot be shared between the Xbox, the PS2 and the GC. They are completely different platforms, with completely different architectures. Any code you can share between them is algorithmic code that can easily be shared with any next-gen system. Art? If you can share art between current systems, why couldn't you do it between a current system and a new system? It may not be everything the new system is capable of displaying, but these consoles don't exactly choke on images that are too easy. (And if the art is designed from the start to be displayed on the Xbox2, then they've already spent the money developing for that system, and it is a trivial process of dumbing it down for lesser machines.) And audio? AUDIO? It's exactly the same. All of it. No difference. There will be no problem here, at all.
I don't think it's a good idea for Microsoft to try to be the first to market in the next generation, but this chap is a raving lunatic. That point is completely invalid, as anyone who's ever even USED a computer or a console before ought to know better than this.
Since then, those formerly communist nations have privatized resources formerly owned by their governments, with remarkable results. Estonia is Europe's new economic wonder: revenue from state-owned property is a smaller percentage of the economy than it is in the United States, and its economy is growing more than twice as fast as ours.
... as in, a balance). Of course the Estonian economy is growing faster than the economy of the US. It's starting from ZERO! If the economy of Estonia were growing at the same rate as the US economy, they would be bad times indeed over there. Especially considering the fact that the US is currently fighting out of an economic recession. (Which, if you can imagine, is not good for the "economic growth" statistic.)
If I wanted to destroy my credibility, I would conclude my article with this paragraph. Apparently, that's exactly what he wanted to do... The US economy is the strongest in the world; its percentage of revenue from state-owned property has something to do with that (you need some
Basically, all of his points seemed dubious, but ending with this one shows that he deserves little to no credibility, and we should all expect, nay, hope, that the FCC will stick around to protect us from the large corporations for some time to come.
Um, that's actually a totally false "translation." In fact, it's pretty close to the opposite of what I said. If you don't like any of Apple's products just because they are Apple, then why do you bother posting/reading this section of the site, and why do you think you're entitled to criticize "fanatics" when you yourself are the primary guilty party? If you don't like the product because it doesn't do what you want it to do, then don't buy it. You can criticize it, sure, but I think it's clear (from the rest of this discussion, and even *gasp* some creative thinking about the possibilities) that this device does more things than any other competing product. It's cheap, but it does more things.
The great-grandparent post accused this device of not being good enough because the audio quality was sub-par. Apparently, he is such a brilliant audiophile that he thinks it's *possible* to transmit full quality audio wirelessly and to offer full quality hi-fi equipment for $130. I think we can all agree that Apple realizes the niche they are aiming at with this product, and it is definitely possible that they decided to release this because it's going to turn out to be a huge niche that is utterly unfilled.
The problem is that you guys are misunderstanding the aim of this device, perhaps because of the logo (which is regrettable), and giving it undue and foolish criticism, regardless of the logo. ***Don't say anything positive about an Apple product. Just admit that you've drunk the kool-aid AND be flamed!***
Actually that's exactly what happened with Godzilla. They made the movie, and realized that it totally sucked. Understanding that it would lose over 75% of its ticket sales from the first week to the second week as people came home and told their friends that it sucked, they hyped it more than anything and got it playing in every theater in the country. Result: huge first week, no sales afterwards. Analysis: successful movie, money-wise.
Why would you want to gamble on the movie when you could know if it's worth it? And if you want to think of it as a gamble, would you rather trust a 20 second commercial to tell you if it's good, or your friend coming over and saying "We're going to see this movie." "Why?" "I've seen it. It rocks. Now let's go." ?
And that's why the studios don't want people to be allowed to use text messaging in theaters. They fear that kids will text message their friends and tell them not to come to the movie. Obviously, they are overlooking the fact that kids will talk to their friends over the phone or in person and tell them if the movie isn't worth it, but the fact that that fear exists says something about the studios' motivation.
Because if you used frequency modulation you wouldn't be using AM radio waves...
AM stands for amplitude modulation. FM stands for frequency modulation.
Because it's not wireless. If the iPod had wi-fi, then you could change the songs playing on your stereo by clicking "Next" on the iPod in your pocket while you're not even looking at the stereo. Thus, completely different solutions to the problem, one of which is ridiculously easier and cooler. I'll let you guess which.
If it's not good enough for you and doesn't do what you need, don't buy it. Buy something that does. If there isn't anything else that quite does what you need, why are you bitching about Apple not providing all your products for you, especially since you probably would never buy any of their products? How you got modded up, I don't know, but Apple didn't release this saying "This is the best Hi-Fi device ever, and it plays perfect sound and it does everything you'll ever need!!! Insanely great!" Instead, they said "This will let you play music off your stereo instead of your laptop speakers without plugging it in. This will extend your wireless network's range. This will act as a wireless print server for all the computers in your house. It's easy! And cheap!" It's not a fucking high fidelity audio appliance, you tit, it's designed to make things easy and better than they would be if you were playing MP3s off your computer. And that's what it fucking does.
And no, I'm not some fanatic Apple apologist. I just dislike assholes. They make me have to yell.
Statistics would of course be difficult to compile for this. I can, however, give a personal account.
I used to download movies off the internet, and a lot of them certainly were of the CAM variety. I had my TV hooked up to my computer, and could watch movies whenever I wanted to from the comfort of my couch. When I found a new release that I genuinely liked, I would tell my friends that it's good and we'd all go see it in the theater. If a movie sucked, I would tell the group and we would avoid it when we went to the theater. So, basically, movie piracy does not inherently make ticket sales go up or down. If a movie is good, pirates will be more likely to go to the theater to see it, and bring their friends. If a movie sucks, then the pirates know it and can't be tricked. Ultimately, if the studios think that piracy is hurting ticket sales that much, it may well be because people always know which movies suck, and how much, and don't bother wasting all their money and time watching it at the theater.
I stopped downloading movies because so many movies started to suck so badly that I couldn't even justify the couple hundred MB per movie on my hard drive or the 2 hours on my couch to bother with it any more. And after doing that for a couple of years, I became able to predict which movies would be good based on the trailers pretty accurately, so it lost its necessity.
Especially since the Xbox Next will be running XNA, the next generation version of DirectX, which will also be used on the PC platform for the same purpose. Essentially, games companies will be able to write one game, and with very little glue code can get it to run on both the PC and the Xbox2. And they'll be network compatible, so you can use your PC to play online against someone with their Xbox2 (at least according to the article). There will probably be very few Xbox2 exclusive titles, and it will have nothing to do with the technology. If you can write an Xbox2 game, you can run it on a PC.
A private venture may well be much more concerned about fuel efficiency. After all, that's one of the major complaints about NASA: they spend too much money. Private companies would not be interested in wasting nearly as much money. And while it probably costs more to produce better rocket fuel (there are also ways to prevent this), it costs a hell of a lot more to lose a payload on account of bad fuel. I'm sure space-faring companies would be able to recognize this.
It (the machine) is not really "running" the operating system if you have to emulate it (using MOL, which stands for Mac On Linux). The machine is *running* linux, which in turn is *running* OS X. The machine itself is not technically running OS X. It uses OpenFirmware, but there is a proprietary Mac ROM which is required for the machine to be able to (directly) run OS X. This is why the homebrew PPC machine from Yellow Dog cannot have OS X installed, only linux.
There are also people who use iTunes and iTMS and own iPods, but don't use a Mac. Like me. iTunes and iTMS are software products that work on Windows. The iPod works on Windows. I makes sense, logically, that the iPod division would be the one that would interface with Windows machines, and they are separating that from the Mac division so that there is no conflict of interest of any kind.
Idiot. Mac OS X may *RUN* on the AmigaOne, but it will not *BOOT*. You can run it through linux, via MOL, but it will not boot by itself without the ROM. This has been the case for ... forever.
But that's not even a problem. OpenOffice.org does that just fine. The problems with the linux desktop lie in the fact that the desktop environments are subpar. "Cite"* all the reasons you please that the problem is with Office, that's not a real problem. This is.
* In quotes because it was not cited at all.
Well that was an idiotic comment. Microsoft FORCED Dell into a certain OEM agreement whereby they could only sell Windows at the price they were getting if they agreed not to give anyone the option. Microsoft FORCED Dell. Dell FORCED you. Hence, Microsoft FORCED you to pay for Windows. Otherwise, you don't get the product you want.
if some other company came along and implemented a ppc chip that implemented the same instruction set as the g3-g5 chips and used hardware components (ethernet, video, sound) that are compatible with os x's drivers and implement the openfirmware STANDARD then it will run os x.
That's not actually true. It won't run OS X unless the board has the proper Mac ROM that can only be had from Apple that allows MacOS to run on a particular machine. OS X will not run without this ROM chip.
Also, when Petrley complains that you need to edit GConf to change the default behavior, instead of finding a prominent checkbox, Jorge (a) lists 3 ways to change the current behavior
That's interesting, because it is, by definition, impossible to change the DEFAULT behavior. That's the point of making it default. It's always the same on installation. You can change the CURRENT behavior away from the default, but you cannot change the default itself. And that is what Petreley does not understand, but Jorge does.