Honestly, the component prices listed in this article are very, very conservative, but actually RTFA and you get a good idea of what to go for when putting together a SOLID (not CHEAP/CRAP) PC.
I put together a PC with similar components for my mom, and the final price (not including a monitor because it doesn't make sense to pay to ship a monitor) was $180. In the Silicon Valley I have access to a lot of surplus computer parts places, but anywhere else you could find prices just as good or better through websites or mail-order.
This article is more of a guideline to building the ultimate budget box, not a frickin' blueprint or Bill Of Materials (for you manufacturing types out there). It basically points you in the right direction so you can avoid a lot of the research I had to go through to find the same components, but you do still have to use your BRAIN.
What's the date on that paper in the link? It appears to be 1992-1993, and it definitely seems to contain a lot of old American paranoia about Japan from the early 90's.
Back then, everybody thought Japan was unstoppable, and would literally take over America. I wrote papers in college back then (around 1989-1991) showing how this was foolish paranoia and how Japanese economic might was nearing the beginning of a drastic decline.
Looking back over the last 10 years, you'd have to be xenophobic or just plain ignorant to argue otherwise...
If you've never used Linux, AIX, Lotus Domino, etc., you get books, On-the-Job-Training, and certification assistance. You don't get overlooked because you need a little training, that's just plain ridiculous. No employer works that way because if they did, they'd never be able to hire anyone.
So, if that's the case with those tools, why would it be any different with Windows, MS Office, etc.??? It's not.
We once had an Operations Manager who took 4 solid hours to learn how to look up a part in our ERP system (that was including taking notes), when it takes the average person 2-4 minutes to learn the same thing. Our current Operations Manager can't multiply two cells in Microsoft Excel. Do you think either of these guys will lose their job because of it??? NO.
Needless to say, if you can't pick up on-the-job-training, your career future is very, very dim.
You honestly sound like one of the guys who sends me resumes filled with every single little skill you have. Let me give you a clue -- we don't care, and we'll just gloss over that half-page list of skills. Why? Because every guy you hire that tells you he's used XYZ application or OS for *years* STILL needs On-the-Job-Training!!!
Universities train you to understand concepts, not specific tools. That's why most people who hire (like me) put fresh graduates at the bottom of the resume pile. Those people who've just finished 4-8 years in the university don't know most if not all of the tools any company uses.
I ask one applicant recently, "Oh, you just graduated and you have Linux experience? Which distros?" He replies, "Oh, Redhat 6, but just from using it during class".
You think they train you to use Windows XP and to admin Exchange or Domino in typical universities??? Give me a break, that's what certifications are for...
I think the key here is WINE -- forget emulators like VMWare and VPC.
I can compile and run WINE on Mac OS X right now. The problem is I can't run any Windows apps because I don't have an Intel CPU on my Mac. They ported a couple of small Windows apps to PowerPC for proof-of-concept, but WINE is essentially useless on Mac OS X right now.
Unless you get one of these Intel Macs. Then, there shouldn't be any reason why you can't compile WINE in OS X and run any Windows app in OS X like I run in Linux right now. I successfully run Lotus Notes (work), Office 2003, and several other weird little Windows apps I need for work on my Linux PC at work.
The first thing I'll do when I get an Intel Mac (for work) is to test compile WINE and see if I can run the above Windows apps.
Being able to run Windows apps, especially Windows itself in a dual boot scenario, will really kill almost all opposition to buying Macs at work. Often, but not always, the Macs we could buy instead of the standard laptops we buy are very price competitive so the main reason business or I.T. people don't even entertain buying Macs is they "can't run Windows software".
Just like Linux, once somebody can see that they can do everything they want in the non-Windows OS, they're very likely to stop using Windows altogether. That's why it's very important that dual booting Windows be possible -- it doesn't have to be incredibly easy for I.T. people like me, but just not a big headache.
I have about a dozen people (out of 160) who will switch to Macs immediately if they can dual boot Windows as a safety net.
You're right, the Gateway has the dual core CPU -- I couldn't find another laptop in production with this CPU, and even recent reviews were on pre-production laptops.
Anyway, when I customize the Gateway with Windows XP Pro (+$100), 1 512mb memory module (+$40), a 1400x1050 display matching the MacBook (+$100), an 80gb HD (+$35), and Bluetooth (+$50), the price I end up with is $1625 before shipping and handling (correct me if I'm wrong, but Gateway is mail order only).
That's not including the software bundle that comes with the MacBook, but I'm assuming you already have all the Windows software that does photo, movie, DVD, and website editing? If you don't, that extra cost will easily close the gap between the Gateway and Apple laptops.
Even not considering that, like others have said, I don't think you can compare the quality of a Gateway laptop to the quality of an Apple laptop. And, I own Apple, Gateway, and eMachines hardware (eMachines acquired Gateway from the inside out). I love my AMD64 eMachines laptop, but comparing it's sturdiness and quality to my 15" PowerBook is a joke.
Well, 5 hours per day is kind of borderline -- some people are fine on 4-5 hours per day, others need 7-8 or more to be productive.
Personally, I've found that if I sleep less than 5 hours I'm tired, but if I sleep more than 6 hours I'm also tired or even have a headache (at 8 hours, I often have a headache). So, over the years of working an 8-5 I.T. job, I've found the best middleground for sleep is getting to bed by midnight, then up by 6am -- with that much sleep, I'm always ready to go. It also allows me to go to bed a little later or get up a little earlier if I want to for various reasons.
Years ago before I was in I.T., I was in the artillery in the U.S. Army. Artillerymen are *required* to stay awake for 72 hours straight on a regular basis as part of our duty (have to be prepared for fire missions for long periods in a time of war). So, I learned to go to sleep very quickly (it takes about 2 minutes for me to go into snoring mode according to my wife), and I'm pretty quick to get up in the morning.
Also, my first two years after college I worked 16-20 hours a day, 5-6 days a week, because I had 2-3 jobs while I was getting established (like most techies, it took me a couple of years to find a *good* job after I got my degree).
So, I have plenty of experience with sleep deprivation. I can tell you first-hand, if you're staring fairly constantly at a computer screen for 15+ hours per day, every day, your vision will be affected. That really depends on how you're using the computer, though. I've been using computers for 16 hours per day for over 15 years, but I take breaks every 15 minutes or so. Sometimes it's walking around, sometimes just talking to people, sometimes reading manuals, or whatever.
I've sometimes gone for 8-10 hours playing a game (WoW or Civ immediately come to mind), and if that's the kind of non-stop computer usage you're doing for 15 hours per day, you've got to change it or break it up somehow.
Man, the PVP has to be controlled, of course! Nobody said, "We want shitty PVP!"
Have you played WoW? Have you tried PvP in WoW? It's mostly done right.
I played in WoW for 7 months before even getting involved in PvP in any way. You can't just be attacked/mugged and have items stolen unless you flag yourself as being open to PvP. Even then, they don't get shit from killing you, just honor (if you are within 4-5 levels of them). You could be killed 50 times and lose no armor durability or anything else -- and recovering your body in WoW is not painful like in games like EQ2.
The bottom line is PvP can be implemented so it doesn't bother people like me who mostly like PvE. And it can be available so people like me can try it out if we want.
Every MMORPG doesn't have to be the all-and-everything, but without competing on all major features with other MMORPG's, it will never be in the same class. If it doesn't compete on the major features, it's doomed to a niche. Nothing wrong with that, but don't even try to compare this game to other MMORPG's like WoW if it doesn't even offer the same major features.
Your experience is exactly why I stopped playing EQ2 -- it was a little too much like punishment for me when I'm paying a monthly fee. Not the same when you buy the game and that's it.
I know people who still play EQ2 regardless, but I think most people feel like you do -- what you described is NOT good gameplay and won't be rewarded with much success.
I don't think you can make a classic D&D style MMO today and be successful in the mainstream. Blizzard pretty much proved that MMO's can appeal to the mainstream if done right.
If not done right, it'll only appeal to closet D&D geeks...
MMO's are like running restaurants or establishments that occupy people's time fairly exclusively (can't simultaneously eat in 3 different restaurants). They have to work to hang on to their customers. They don't and they'll lose them to an upstart.
That's what I saw happen with WoW and EQ2. I didn't start playing WoW from the beginning, I got into it 4 months after launch -- something like March 2005. I started playing EQ2 in November to December of 2004. Mainly because it looked really cool, and I played EQ years ago.
After 4 months of EQ2, I started hating to play it like I was going to work. I was going to sit down one weeknight to play it for an hour or so before going to bed -- to keep working on my character -- and at the end of the 60-90 minutes I realized I had just thrown away those 60-90 minutes just trying to recover my body after dying repeatedly.
I realized that I seriously felt like I was *paying* someone to abuse me. (S&M, anyone?)
I heard someone mention World of Warcraft and how it's like EQ2 but better, so I checked out a few reviews. After reading reviews, I decided to try it, and liked the (almost) complete lack of punishment. I felt like I was appreciated as a customer, and not being mugged on a daily basis.
Sure, I make stupid mistakes in WoW and waste some of my time, but I have never gotten up from playing it feeling like I just completely wasted my time on frustration.
Sure, WoW isn't perfect and people complain about various aspects of the gaming experience, but it's still the best overall experience out there right now, which is why it reigns supreme. It's kind of like a restaurant or dining experience.
This doesn't hurt the industry, it just guarantees competition and better quality. Like a restaurant, if the latest MMO is way better than any other, everyone will flock to it and the crappy ones will be forced to change to compete or die.
Yet more justification for the developers to make a shitty game.
Are you working on the game?:-)
I have Macs and PC's with both Linux and Windows XP. I play WoW all the time primarily on Mac, but also on Windows XP (doesn't work well under Wine in Linux).
I will pay for this game (yes, a subscription) if it's not shitty. If it only runs on one of my three operating environments (Windows), it's gonna have to be REALLY good for me to pay for it. So, by excluding two platforms, they're making their job tougher because the game's gonna have to be that much better.
The whole reason they're doing it is probably because they already know it's a shitty game, so it's probably doomed anyway.
I'll try it in Windows anyway. If it's as shitty as Matrix Online (I believe another Windows-only MMORPG), they'll get a few bucks out of me, but they'll quickly lose my business the same way both Matrix Online and EQ2 did.
If it really is a good game, it'll make it to at least the Mac later (if not Linux using Wine), and I'll probably buy/play it then.
It's the same with another disappointingly shitty game I bought recently: Civ 4. Can't play it on the Mac yet, and I'm not really concerned if it takes 6 months before I can. 2 days of disappointingly buggy play on two Windows PC's, and I'm back to playing WoW. On one PC, it was crashing literally every 15-20 minutes, while on the other PC it wasn't -- both had the latest version. On the one that wasn't crashing, it was surprisingly boring enough to lose my interest in 2-3 days.
Oh well, you can't get money out of people if you either don't try to sell them anything or you continually try to sell them shit...
Re:Java use slipping? You have to be joking
on
Java Is So 90s
·
· Score: 1
You call that evidence of the popularity of Java? Are you kidding?
I'm guessing you haven't actually browsed the projects on sourceforge recently. There's a lot of half-assed crap on there -- many are just abandoned pipe-dreams.
No offense to sf.net (I find good stuff on there all the time), but the standards really are rock-bottom....
Nice try, "Anonymous Coward", but I don't believe you know even one I.T. Director.
I'm an I.T. Director, and have been for 15 years. I know more than every I.T. guy under me because if they are either fucking up or fucking us, there is no WAY they can hide it from me. I'm paid very well to make sure the I.T. grunts do their jobs, do it at a reasonable pace, and do not try to pull any bullshit. I've sent one I.T. grunt and three other employees to jail over those 15 years for being stupid enough to think that I don't know my shit.
If my I.T. guys can't do the job, I am the one called in to do it instead of some outside I.T. company that charges over $300/hour. That's the way the smart companies here in the Silicon Valley do it.
Oh, and by the way, I can say fuck and shit as much as I want regardless of whether I'm an executive or not.
I do think the guy you replied to was full of shit, but you're just as full of shit when you say that I.T. Directors don't need to be technical. Some I.T. Directors are just paper pushers and project managers, but many of us are real experts!
I don't mean to belittle the method you're describing that's used in Utah, but it's really not that hard to get to 1500 13th Street without a map.
I don't need to know if it's east or west of city center, I just need to know where 1st Street is. I travel to different cities across the U.S. a little bit (maybe a dozen times a year), and all it takes is one look at a city map to get around.
The problem comes in with streets that are *not* numbered like 1st and 13th. For instance, I live in the Silicon Valley, and how does a noob know where the corner of Market and Santa Clara is? You have to look at a map and see where those streets are relative to the numbered streets like 1st and 13th.
If the whole Silicon Valley were numbered like you are describing, I never would've had to carry a map book in my car since 1990, and I wouldn't need a GPS now.
But, then again, the system you are describing is a little bit too borg-ish for me -- like living in a computer where a memory or hard disk location is obvious as soon as you look at it...
Another use for fast broadband for an I.T. geek like me:
rsync'ing the entire SuSE Linux 9.3 distro to the server in my house for local installs and setups.
I'm doing that right now on a server at work using our standard T1 and on a server in my house using 6mbit cable, and it's running 4-6 times faster in my house. I'm taking the work server home so it will be done tonight.
I don't download ISO's all the time, but there are things like this that make the fastest broadband connection very necessary.
Another work example is when I need to sync a copy of a whole website to a local disk for offline use by one of our employees. Every bit of extra bandwidth makes it faster, and the difference can mean hours for a site with only a few hundred megabytes of files, but tens of thousands of files.
Also, because I can test things like this using my work T1 and my home cable connection, I can tell you that sometimes even slow connections to web servers hosted by companies that can't afford a fatter pipe are faster when you have a fatter pipe.
I agree with what you're saying, but having programmed since the late 70's I find it ironic that you're comparing the word "software" to "solution".
I don't remember people calling the stuff we made and used in the 70's to early 80's "software". We called them programs or routines. We didn't "use software", we "ran programs".
It makes me wonder who coined the word "software" in the first place? A google search turns up an article from 2000 stating that a Princeton professor Tukey did:
Either word just makes it easier to describe what you're talking about to whoever you're talking. It could be two programmers or two executives, but whatever works...
What you're saying is very true as far as their racism line being drawn at the point where you are white or Japanese.
But, to be fair, as far as asian culture the Japanese are not alone in the practice of that kind of racism.
I'm German-American and my wife is Vietnamese. But, I dated a lot of asian women from many different countries before I got married, mainly because I moved from the midwest (South Dakota where literally 99.8% of the population is white) to California when I was 20.
There are so many asian people in California that I've dated (and become very familiar with) Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, Laotian, Philipino, Korean, and Thai women. Growing up in a virtually all white culture, I couldn't tell them apart, although now I can. So, of course, it never occurred to me that they would discriminate against each other -- they are all asian!
But the most amazing thing to me was to discover that they all had that discrimination in common. They, and all their families, all absolutely hated and belittled people from every other asian culture. You wouldn't believe the terrible things they would say -- I mean, some of it I can't or don't want to repeat.
My wife is still the same way, but to be honest becoming Americanized is helping her to become more tolerant -- say what you want about Americans, but we are a hell of a lot more tolerant than any asians I've ever met from any of the countries mentioned above. Any of them will tell you that Chinese people are cheap and money-grubbing, Japanese people are weak/sick people and not really asian anyway, Laotians are just plain cheap and poor, Vietnamese are poor and willing to do anything for any amount of money, Koreans are brutal/mean and ugly, and Thais are lazy.
They'll tell you those things generally like I said, except about their own ethnic group. And, if they have to work/collaborate with any of those other asian people, they'll hide the discrimination until they separate into their own groups at lunch or during breaks.
I've lived and worked in California for 15 years, and I still see this today in workplaces and schools. My step-daughter (100% Vietnamese) is 17 and tells me the same things about her high school. Kids generally tend to separate into ethnic clichs instead of the nerds/jocks/popular clichs I had when I was a kid, but some don't care like my step-daughter. I'm very sure the ethnic clichs are driven by the racism those kids are constantly exposed to at home from their immigrant parents.
Anyway, the point is that this deeply-embedded racism that people always talk about Japanese people having is actually common to pretty much all the people from east-asian cultures that I've ever met.
Why is that? Alan Kay has great influence on programming practice, shouldn't you expect him to program as well?
No.
Just because someone is a genius at designing methods for doing some thing, does NOT automatically mean they are good, let alone a genius, at doing that thing.
If you actually are a programmer in the private sector (where your source of income actually depends on how well you program), I can't believe you are a good one...
From a corporate I.T. perspective, an Apple server like we see today running true UNIX as Mac OS X does AND having Intel-standard CPU's seriously threatens Linux on corporate servers.
From a technical perspective, I'll take a Unix server/workstation over a Linux server/workstation if I can run Windows on it when I want, which Apple was quoted as saying they won't try to stop.
To me, the quality of Apple's hardware is just as good as Dell or IBM. If I'm comparing IBM PowerPC hardware with AIX to Dell Intel hardware with Linux (we use SuSE everywhere, by the way), I'll pick Dell with SuSE. Add Apple Intel hardware running BSD-standard OS X Server to that comparison list, and I'll pick the Apple hardware because like the Dell hardware I can install Windows Server on it later.
You do have to consider driver and software compatibility that Linux offers, but for basic corporate applications like file servers, web servers, etc., that's a non-issue. Some commercial software that runs on Linux already has a version for Mac OS X. The open source applications usually compile for Mac OS X easily.
The fact that Linux is basically free, though, will make it the pick for some applications. There will also be some situations where the required applications have better support on Linux or no support at all for Mac OS X, and Linux would be the pick there.
Basically I think this will put Apple in competition at the top end of Linux applications, and the low end of high-availability server applications.
In workstations, this will put Apple where Jobs always wanted to be with NeXT -- high performance, high reliability workstations. What do people need with a high-end workstation when PC's are so powerful? Windows can't be all things to all people, and anybody who tells you Windows XP is just as good as a solid UNIX workstation OS is just plain full of sh*t.
You can't provide what home consumers need to play video games without trade-offs for the CAD engineers or graphic designers. The same goes the other way -- you can't provide the stability for high-end users without trade-offs for those home and gameplayers.
So, this will threaten Linux's gains in corporations, but when it comes to a guy downloading Linux to install on his home computer to play around with it, Apple won't compete there and doesn't want to. They've already stated in interviews that you will not be able to buy/install Mac OS X for anything but Apple hardware (PowerPC or Intel), so for the hobbyist and low-end workstations/servers, Linux will still dominate.
But, for corporate or power users, a workstation with hardware and software integrated that can run either UNIX or Windows apps will be much more appealing than a Linux box. I've been trying to switch 100% to Linux on my desktop for more than five years, and still haven't been able to for various minor but important reasons...
Nobody has to guess or predict anything, read a few f-ing articles like on ZDNet, which had these quotes:
After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."
However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.
I don't know about anybody else here, but that makes it pretty damn clear, in two short quotes, what exactly is more important to Apple, hardware or software. It's the hardware, man!
Not only do they not care if someone installs/runs Windows on an Apple/Intel Mac, they're making it very clear they will not allow someone to install Mac OS X on anything but an Apple/Intel Mac.
It's a very good way to simultaneously make it clear that they're not going to support every funky piece of x86 hardware out there, and they are not out to compete with Microsoft/Windows.
I would also say that this announcement and those two quotes set up Microsoft and Apple to be closer partners since Microsoft has always wanted nothing more than to make great software for great hardware, and now it seems that Apple is coming around to that way of thinking, too.
I agree with another poster that TV is NOT a reward.
The whole problem in your analogy is you're not seeing that the allowance comparison does NOT involve the use of a device to enforce your parental rules. This thing is a device that people are supposed to use to babysit their kids, much like they already use TV.
Either way, that's wrong.
With an allowance, your kid has to do certain chores for the week (homework, cleaning room, helping, being nice/good, etc.) to get the allowance. There is no device monitoring your kid to make sure they did all that stuff, you are supposed to verify it because YOU are the parent, not some device. Software like NetNanny is similarly warped.
If someone came out with some monitor that you put around your kid's neck to verify they did everything they were supposed to to get their allowance, I think we'd be against that, too.
I don't think anybody objecting to the use of this device has a problem with a parent telling their kid they have to go play at the park for 2 hours to watch TV for 2 hours:
The problem is when you depend on a device to do your job as a parent.
I know some people have to work during the day and leave their kids at day care, but it has to stop SOMEWHERE. At some point, you have to take the responsibility that comes with being a parent.
Some people will justify the use of a device like this by saying it's just a way for them to make absolutely sure their kids are doing what they tell them.
If that's your excuse for using crutches like these, you need to work on your relationship with your kid!
Go ahead and mod me down, but how can it be "Insightful" to point out "extrasolar" is misspelled, but someone pointing out that the word "asterisk" is misspelled is a Troll?
I suppose I'll be modded "Redundant" for pointing out what everyone else does -- that Slashdot moderation is ridiculously meaningless...
The problem with your argument is that you aren't mentioning all the games available for consoles that will never be on a Windows PC. What do you think of Halo 2? Halo 2 is HUGE, and you can only buy it for a console.
You have no idea about those games, and he has no idea about the games you mentioned (and he probably doesn't give a rat's butt, either). Why don't you head on over to GameSpot, then come back and tell us how many of those games available for consoles that you can play:
http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/index.html?tag=gs_he ad _ps2
Both gaming platforms have titles that are not on the other. That is going away, however, now that the consoles are becoming so much more powerful than Gaming PC's. I look at consoles today, and I can't for the life of me understand why someone would pay 3-8 times as much for a Gaming PC than for a console.
I assume you're trying to say you still use Windows because you're a gamer.
Well, I've got news for you:
The Windows Gaming PC is an endangered species.
I don't care what piece of hardware you use, a Gamer wants to play games. More and more games are coming to consoles before Windows PC's because the audience is bigger.
The Mac is to the Windows PC what the Windows Gaming PC is to the Gaming Console.
Game developers are starting to release titles for Gaming Consoles first because the headaches of developing for Windows Gaming PC's lengthen development time. More people buy Gaming Consoles instead of Windows Gaming PC's simply because of the cost -- the same reason people buy Windows PC's instead of Macs.
More people stop using their Windows PC for gaming in favor of a Gaming Console because of the high cost of upgrades. Have you seen the cost of the NVidia 6800 video card? Who wants to spend $300-$800 per year in Windows Gaming PC upgrades???
The bottom line is, once someone negates your gaming argument, the article makes a lot of sense. What do you do on a Windows PC that you can't do on a Mac or Linux PC?
This is exactly why I switched from a Windows PC two years ago to a Mac, and I haven't gone back. The Mac just works, and it lets you work. And, for most of the reasons in the article, I switched my server from Windows 2000 Server to Linux. Linux just works, and never stops working from my point of view.
Slashdot Mirror
Honestly, the component prices listed in this article are very, very conservative, but actually RTFA and you get a good idea of what to go for when putting together a SOLID (not CHEAP/CRAP) PC.
I put together a PC with similar components for my mom, and the final price (not including a monitor because it doesn't make sense to pay to ship a monitor) was $180. In the Silicon Valley I have access to a lot of surplus computer parts places, but anywhere else you could find prices just as good or better through websites or mail-order.
This article is more of a guideline to building the ultimate budget box, not a frickin' blueprint or Bill Of Materials (for you manufacturing types out there). It basically points you in the right direction so you can avoid a lot of the research I had to go through to find the same components, but you do still have to use your BRAIN.
Nothing in life is free, after all...
What's the date on that paper in the link? It appears to be 1992-1993, and it definitely seems to contain a lot of old American paranoia about Japan from the early 90's.
Back then, everybody thought Japan was unstoppable, and would literally take over America. I wrote papers in college back then (around 1989-1991) showing how this was foolish paranoia and how Japanese economic might was nearing the beginning of a drastic decline.
Looking back over the last 10 years, you'd have to be xenophobic or just plain ignorant to argue otherwise...
I'm an employer.
If you've never used Linux, AIX, Lotus Domino, etc., you get books, On-the-Job-Training, and certification assistance. You don't get overlooked because you need a little training, that's just plain ridiculous. No employer works that way because if they did, they'd never be able to hire anyone.
So, if that's the case with those tools, why would it be any different with Windows, MS Office, etc.??? It's not.
We once had an Operations Manager who took 4 solid hours to learn how to look up a part in our ERP system (that was including taking notes), when it takes the average person 2-4 minutes to learn the same thing. Our current Operations Manager can't multiply two cells in Microsoft Excel. Do you think either of these guys will lose their job because of it??? NO.
Needless to say, if you can't pick up on-the-job-training, your career future is very, very dim.
You honestly sound like one of the guys who sends me resumes filled with every single little skill you have. Let me give you a clue -- we don't care, and we'll just gloss over that half-page list of skills. Why? Because every guy you hire that tells you he's used XYZ application or OS for *years* STILL needs On-the-Job-Training!!!
Universities train you to understand concepts, not specific tools. That's why most people who hire (like me) put fresh graduates at the bottom of the resume pile. Those people who've just finished 4-8 years in the university don't know most if not all of the tools any company uses.
I ask one applicant recently, "Oh, you just graduated and you have Linux experience? Which distros?" He replies, "Oh, Redhat 6, but just from using it during class".
You think they train you to use Windows XP and to admin Exchange or Domino in typical universities??? Give me a break, that's what certifications are for...
I think the key here is WINE -- forget emulators like VMWare and VPC.
I can compile and run WINE on Mac OS X right now. The problem is I can't run any Windows apps because I don't have an Intel CPU on my Mac. They ported a couple of small Windows apps to PowerPC for proof-of-concept, but WINE is essentially useless on Mac OS X right now.
Unless you get one of these Intel Macs. Then, there shouldn't be any reason why you can't compile WINE in OS X and run any Windows app in OS X like I run in Linux right now. I successfully run Lotus Notes (work), Office 2003, and several other weird little Windows apps I need for work on my Linux PC at work.
Check out for more info:
http://darwine.opendarwin.org/
The first thing I'll do when I get an Intel Mac (for work) is to test compile WINE and see if I can run the above Windows apps.
Being able to run Windows apps, especially Windows itself in a dual boot scenario, will really kill almost all opposition to buying Macs at work. Often, but not always, the Macs we could buy instead of the standard laptops we buy are very price competitive so the main reason business or I.T. people don't even entertain buying Macs is they "can't run Windows software".
Just like Linux, once somebody can see that they can do everything they want in the non-Windows OS, they're very likely to stop using Windows altogether. That's why it's very important that dual booting Windows be possible -- it doesn't have to be incredibly easy for I.T. people like me, but just not a big headache.
I have about a dozen people (out of 160) who will switch to Macs immediately if they can dual boot Windows as a safety net.
You're right, the Gateway has the dual core CPU -- I couldn't find another laptop in production with this CPU, and even recent reviews were on pre-production laptops.
Anyway, when I customize the Gateway with Windows XP Pro (+$100), 1 512mb memory module (+$40), a 1400x1050 display matching the MacBook (+$100), an 80gb HD (+$35), and Bluetooth (+$50), the price I end up with is $1625 before shipping and handling (correct me if I'm wrong, but Gateway is mail order only).
That's not including the software bundle that comes with the MacBook, but I'm assuming you already have all the Windows software that does photo, movie, DVD, and website editing? If you don't, that extra cost will easily close the gap between the Gateway and Apple laptops.
Even not considering that, like others have said, I don't think you can compare the quality of a Gateway laptop to the quality of an Apple laptop. And, I own Apple, Gateway, and eMachines hardware (eMachines acquired Gateway from the inside out). I love my AMD64 eMachines laptop, but comparing it's sturdiness and quality to my 15" PowerBook is a joke.
Well, 5 hours per day is kind of borderline -- some people are fine on 4-5 hours per day, others need 7-8 or more to be productive.
Personally, I've found that if I sleep less than 5 hours I'm tired, but if I sleep more than 6 hours I'm also tired or even have a headache (at 8 hours, I often have a headache). So, over the years of working an 8-5 I.T. job, I've found the best middleground for sleep is getting to bed by midnight, then up by 6am -- with that much sleep, I'm always ready to go. It also allows me to go to bed a little later or get up a little earlier if I want to for various reasons.
Years ago before I was in I.T., I was in the artillery in the U.S. Army. Artillerymen are *required* to stay awake for 72 hours straight on a regular basis as part of our duty (have to be prepared for fire missions for long periods in a time of war). So, I learned to go to sleep very quickly (it takes about 2 minutes for me to go into snoring mode according to my wife), and I'm pretty quick to get up in the morning.
Also, my first two years after college I worked 16-20 hours a day, 5-6 days a week, because I had 2-3 jobs while I was getting established (like most techies, it took me a couple of years to find a *good* job after I got my degree).
So, I have plenty of experience with sleep deprivation. I can tell you first-hand, if you're staring fairly constantly at a computer screen for 15+ hours per day, every day, your vision will be affected. That really depends on how you're using the computer, though. I've been using computers for 16 hours per day for over 15 years, but I take breaks every 15 minutes or so. Sometimes it's walking around, sometimes just talking to people, sometimes reading manuals, or whatever.
I've sometimes gone for 8-10 hours playing a game (WoW or Civ immediately come to mind), and if that's the kind of non-stop computer usage you're doing for 15 hours per day, you've got to change it or break it up somehow.
Man, the PVP has to be controlled, of course! Nobody said, "We want shitty PVP!"
Have you played WoW? Have you tried PvP in WoW? It's mostly done right.
I played in WoW for 7 months before even getting involved in PvP in any way. You can't just be attacked/mugged and have items stolen unless you flag yourself as being open to PvP. Even then, they don't get shit from killing you, just honor (if you are within 4-5 levels of them). You could be killed 50 times and lose no armor durability or anything else -- and recovering your body in WoW is not painful like in games like EQ2.
The bottom line is PvP can be implemented so it doesn't bother people like me who mostly like PvE. And it can be available so people like me can try it out if we want.
Every MMORPG doesn't have to be the all-and-everything, but without competing on all major features with other MMORPG's, it will never be in the same class. If it doesn't compete on the major features, it's doomed to a niche. Nothing wrong with that, but don't even try to compare this game to other MMORPG's like WoW if it doesn't even offer the same major features.
Your experience is exactly why I stopped playing EQ2 -- it was a little too much like punishment for me when I'm paying a monthly fee. Not the same when you buy the game and that's it.
I know people who still play EQ2 regardless, but I think most people feel like you do -- what you described is NOT good gameplay and won't be rewarded with much success.
I don't think you can make a classic D&D style MMO today and be successful in the mainstream. Blizzard pretty much proved that MMO's can appeal to the mainstream if done right.
If not done right, it'll only appeal to closet D&D geeks...
MMO's are like running restaurants or establishments that occupy people's time fairly exclusively (can't simultaneously eat in 3 different restaurants). They have to work to hang on to their customers. They don't and they'll lose them to an upstart.
That's what I saw happen with WoW and EQ2. I didn't start playing WoW from the beginning, I got into it 4 months after launch -- something like March 2005. I started playing EQ2 in November to December of 2004. Mainly because it looked really cool, and I played EQ years ago.
After 4 months of EQ2, I started hating to play it like I was going to work. I was going to sit down one weeknight to play it for an hour or so before going to bed -- to keep working on my character -- and at the end of the 60-90 minutes I realized I had just thrown away those 60-90 minutes just trying to recover my body after dying repeatedly.
I realized that I seriously felt like I was *paying* someone to abuse me. (S&M, anyone?)
I heard someone mention World of Warcraft and how it's like EQ2 but better, so I checked out a few reviews. After reading reviews, I decided to try it, and liked the (almost) complete lack of punishment. I felt like I was appreciated as a customer, and not being mugged on a daily basis.
Sure, I make stupid mistakes in WoW and waste some of my time, but I have never gotten up from playing it feeling like I just completely wasted my time on frustration.
Sure, WoW isn't perfect and people complain about various aspects of the gaming experience, but it's still the best overall experience out there right now, which is why it reigns supreme. It's kind of like a restaurant or dining experience.
This doesn't hurt the industry, it just guarantees competition and better quality. Like a restaurant, if the latest MMO is way better than any other, everyone will flock to it and the crappy ones will be forced to change to compete or die.
Yet more justification for the developers to make a shitty game.
:-)
Are you working on the game?
I have Macs and PC's with both Linux and Windows XP. I play WoW all the time primarily on Mac, but also on Windows XP (doesn't work well under Wine in Linux).
I will pay for this game (yes, a subscription) if it's not shitty. If it only runs on one of my three operating environments (Windows), it's gonna have to be REALLY good for me to pay for it. So, by excluding two platforms, they're making their job tougher because the game's gonna have to be that much better.
The whole reason they're doing it is probably because they already know it's a shitty game, so it's probably doomed anyway.
I'll try it in Windows anyway. If it's as shitty as Matrix Online (I believe another Windows-only MMORPG), they'll get a few bucks out of me, but they'll quickly lose my business the same way both Matrix Online and EQ2 did.
If it really is a good game, it'll make it to at least the Mac later (if not Linux using Wine), and I'll probably buy/play it then.
It's the same with another disappointingly shitty game I bought recently: Civ 4. Can't play it on the Mac yet, and I'm not really concerned if it takes 6 months before I can. 2 days of disappointingly buggy play on two Windows PC's, and I'm back to playing WoW. On one PC, it was crashing literally every 15-20 minutes, while on the other PC it wasn't -- both had the latest version. On the one that wasn't crashing, it was surprisingly boring enough to lose my interest in 2-3 days.
Oh well, you can't get money out of people if you either don't try to sell them anything or you continually try to sell them shit...
You call that evidence of the popularity of Java? Are you kidding?
I'm guessing you haven't actually browsed the projects on sourceforge recently. There's a lot of half-assed crap on there -- many are just abandoned pipe-dreams.
No offense to sf.net (I find good stuff on there all the time), but the standards really are rock-bottom....
Nice try, "Anonymous Coward", but I don't believe you know even one I.T. Director.
I'm an I.T. Director, and have been for 15 years. I know more than every I.T. guy under me because if they are either fucking up or fucking us, there is no WAY they can hide it from me. I'm paid very well to make sure the I.T. grunts do their jobs, do it at a reasonable pace, and do not try to pull any bullshit. I've sent one I.T. grunt and three other employees to jail over those 15 years for being stupid enough to think that I don't know my shit.
If my I.T. guys can't do the job, I am the one called in to do it instead of some outside I.T. company that charges over $300/hour. That's the way the smart companies here in the Silicon Valley do it.
Oh, and by the way, I can say fuck and shit as much as I want regardless of whether I'm an executive or not.
I do think the guy you replied to was full of shit, but you're just as full of shit when you say that I.T. Directors don't need to be technical. Some I.T. Directors are just paper pushers and project managers, but many of us are real experts!
I don't mean to belittle the method you're describing that's used in Utah, but it's really not that hard to get to 1500 13th Street without a map.
I don't need to know if it's east or west of city center, I just need to know where 1st Street is. I travel to different cities across the U.S. a little bit (maybe a dozen times a year), and all it takes is one look at a city map to get around.
The problem comes in with streets that are *not* numbered like 1st and 13th. For instance, I live in the Silicon Valley, and how does a noob know where the corner of Market and Santa Clara is? You have to look at a map and see where those streets are relative to the numbered streets like 1st and 13th.
If the whole Silicon Valley were numbered like you are describing, I never would've had to carry a map book in my car since 1990, and I wouldn't need a GPS now.
But, then again, the system you are describing is a little bit too borg-ish for me -- like living in a computer where a memory or hard disk location is obvious as soon as you look at it...
Another use for fast broadband for an I.T. geek like me:
rsync'ing the entire SuSE Linux 9.3 distro to the server in my house for local installs and setups.
I'm doing that right now on a server at work using our standard T1 and on a server in my house using 6mbit cable, and it's running 4-6 times faster in my house. I'm taking the work server home so it will be done tonight.
I don't download ISO's all the time, but there are things like this that make the fastest broadband connection very necessary.
Another work example is when I need to sync a copy of a whole website to a local disk for offline use by one of our employees. Every bit of extra bandwidth makes it faster, and the difference can mean hours for a site with only a few hundred megabytes of files, but tens of thousands of files.
Also, because I can test things like this using my work T1 and my home cable connection, I can tell you that sometimes even slow connections to web servers hosted by companies that can't afford a fatter pipe are faster when you have a fatter pipe.
I agree with what you're saying, but having programmed since the late 70's I find it ironic that you're comparing the word "software" to "solution".
/ pioneer.death.ap/
I don't remember people calling the stuff we made and used in the 70's to early 80's "software". We called them programs or routines. We didn't "use software", we "ran programs".
Check Dictionary.com's definition of software:
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=software
It makes me wonder who coined the word "software" in the first place? A google search turns up an article from 2000 stating that a Princeton professor Tukey did:
http://archives.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/07/28
Either word just makes it easier to describe what you're talking about to whoever you're talking. It could be two programmers or two executives, but whatever works...
Wow, I've never seen a more textbook example of why pushing open source (a.k.a. open source) is such an uphill battle.
All I can say is you deserve everything you get using logic like that...
What you're saying is very true as far as their racism line being drawn at the point where you are white or Japanese.
But, to be fair, as far as asian culture the Japanese are not alone in the practice of that kind of racism.
I'm German-American and my wife is Vietnamese. But, I dated a lot of asian women from many different countries before I got married, mainly because I moved from the midwest (South Dakota where literally 99.8% of the population is white) to California when I was 20.
There are so many asian people in California that I've dated (and become very familiar with) Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, Laotian, Philipino, Korean, and Thai women. Growing up in a virtually all white culture, I couldn't tell them apart, although now I can. So, of course, it never occurred to me that they would discriminate against each other -- they are all asian!
But the most amazing thing to me was to discover that they all had that discrimination in common. They, and all their families, all absolutely hated and belittled people from every other asian culture. You wouldn't believe the terrible things they would say -- I mean, some of it I can't or don't want to repeat.
My wife is still the same way, but to be honest becoming Americanized is helping her to become more tolerant -- say what you want about Americans, but we are a hell of a lot more tolerant than any asians I've ever met from any of the countries mentioned above. Any of them will tell you that Chinese people are cheap and money-grubbing, Japanese people are weak/sick people and not really asian anyway, Laotians are just plain cheap and poor, Vietnamese are poor and willing to do anything for any amount of money, Koreans are brutal/mean and ugly, and Thais are lazy.
They'll tell you those things generally like I said, except about their own ethnic group. And, if they have to work/collaborate with any of those other asian people, they'll hide the discrimination until they separate into their own groups at lunch or during breaks.
I've lived and worked in California for 15 years, and I still see this today in workplaces and schools. My step-daughter (100% Vietnamese) is 17 and tells me the same things about her high school. Kids generally tend to separate into ethnic clichs instead of the nerds/jocks/popular clichs I had when I was a kid, but some don't care like my step-daughter. I'm very sure the ethnic clichs are driven by the racism those kids are constantly exposed to at home from their immigrant parents.
Anyway, the point is that this deeply-embedded racism that people always talk about Japanese people having is actually common to pretty much all the people from east-asian cultures that I've ever met.
Why is that? Alan Kay has great influence on programming practice, shouldn't you expect him to program as well?
No.
Just because someone is a genius at designing methods for doing some thing, does NOT automatically mean they are good, let alone a genius, at doing that thing.
If you actually are a programmer in the private sector (where your source of income actually depends on how well you program), I can't believe you are a good one...
From a corporate I.T. perspective, an Apple server like we see today running true UNIX as Mac OS X does AND having Intel-standard CPU's seriously threatens Linux on corporate servers.
From a technical perspective, I'll take a Unix server/workstation over a Linux server/workstation if I can run Windows on it when I want, which Apple was quoted as saying they won't try to stop.
To me, the quality of Apple's hardware is just as good as Dell or IBM. If I'm comparing IBM PowerPC hardware with AIX to Dell Intel hardware with Linux (we use SuSE everywhere, by the way), I'll pick Dell with SuSE. Add Apple Intel hardware running BSD-standard OS X Server to that comparison list, and I'll pick the Apple hardware because like the Dell hardware I can install Windows Server on it later.
You do have to consider driver and software compatibility that Linux offers, but for basic corporate applications like file servers, web servers, etc., that's a non-issue. Some commercial software that runs on Linux already has a version for Mac OS X. The open source applications usually compile for Mac OS X easily.
The fact that Linux is basically free, though, will make it the pick for some applications. There will also be some situations where the required applications have better support on Linux or no support at all for Mac OS X, and Linux would be the pick there.
Basically I think this will put Apple in competition at the top end of Linux applications, and the low end of high-availability server applications.
In workstations, this will put Apple where Jobs always wanted to be with NeXT -- high performance, high reliability workstations. What do people need with a high-end workstation when PC's are so powerful? Windows can't be all things to all people, and anybody who tells you Windows XP is just as good as a solid UNIX workstation OS is just plain full of sh*t.
You can't provide what home consumers need to play video games without trade-offs for the CAD engineers or graphic designers. The same goes the other way -- you can't provide the stability for high-end users without trade-offs for those home and gameplayers.
So, this will threaten Linux's gains in corporations, but when it comes to a guy downloading Linux to install on his home computer to play around with it, Apple won't compete there and doesn't want to. They've already stated in interviews that you will not be able to buy/install Mac OS X for anything but Apple hardware (PowerPC or Intel), so for the hobbyist and low-end workstations/servers, Linux will still dominate.
But, for corporate or power users, a workstation with hardware and software integrated that can run either UNIX or Windows apps will be much more appealing than a Linux box. I've been trying to switch 100% to Linux on my desktop for more than five years, and still haven't been able to for various minor but important reasons...
Nobody has to guess or predict anything, read a few f-ing articles like on ZDNet, which had these quotes:
After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."
However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.
I don't know about anybody else here, but that makes it pretty damn clear, in two short quotes, what exactly is more important to Apple, hardware or software. It's the hardware, man!
Not only do they not care if someone installs/runs Windows on an Apple/Intel Mac, they're making it very clear they will not allow someone to install Mac OS X on anything but an Apple/Intel Mac.
It's a very good way to simultaneously make it clear that they're not going to support every funky piece of x86 hardware out there, and they are not out to compete with Microsoft/Windows.
I would also say that this announcement and those two quotes set up Microsoft and Apple to be closer partners since Microsoft has always wanted nothing more than to make great software for great hardware, and now it seems that Apple is coming around to that way of thinking, too.
I agree with another poster that TV is NOT a reward.
The whole problem in your analogy is you're not seeing that the allowance comparison does NOT involve the use of a device to enforce your parental rules. This thing is a device that people are supposed to use to babysit their kids, much like they already use TV.
Either way, that's wrong.
With an allowance, your kid has to do certain chores for the week (homework, cleaning room, helping, being nice/good, etc.) to get the allowance. There is no device monitoring your kid to make sure they did all that stuff, you are supposed to verify it because YOU are the parent, not some device. Software like NetNanny is similarly warped.
If someone came out with some monitor that you put around your kid's neck to verify they did everything they were supposed to to get their allowance, I think we'd be against that, too.
I don't think anybody objecting to the use of this device has a problem with a parent telling their kid they have to go play at the park for 2 hours to watch TV for 2 hours:
The problem is when you depend on a device to do your job as a parent.
I know some people have to work during the day and leave their kids at day care, but it has to stop SOMEWHERE. At some point, you have to take the responsibility that comes with being a parent.
Some people will justify the use of a device like this by saying it's just a way for them to make absolutely sure their kids are doing what they tell them.
If that's your excuse for using crutches like these, you need to work on your relationship with your kid!
And, I'm speaking as a geek-father of 5 kids...
Go ahead and mod me down, but how can it be "Insightful" to point out "extrasolar" is misspelled, but someone pointing out that the word "asterisk" is misspelled is a Troll?
I suppose I'll be modded "Redundant" for pointing out what everyone else does -- that Slashdot moderation is ridiculously meaningless...
The problem with your argument is that you aren't mentioning all the games available for consoles that will never be on a Windows PC. What do you think of Halo 2? Halo 2 is HUGE, and you can only buy it for a console.
e ad _ps2
You have no idea about those games, and he has no idea about the games you mentioned (and he probably doesn't give a rat's butt, either). Why don't you head on over to GameSpot, then come back and tell us how many of those games available for consoles that you can play:
http://www.gamespot.com/ps2/index.html?tag=gs_h
Both gaming platforms have titles that are not on the other. That is going away, however, now that the consoles are becoming so much more powerful than Gaming PC's. I look at consoles today, and I can't for the life of me understand why someone would pay 3-8 times as much for a Gaming PC than for a console.
"Windows Still Sucks" because "you're a gamer"???
I assume you're trying to say you still use Windows because you're a gamer.
Well, I've got news for you:
The Windows Gaming PC is an endangered species.
I don't care what piece of hardware you use, a Gamer wants to play games. More and more games are coming to consoles before Windows PC's because the audience is bigger.
The Mac is to the Windows PC what the Windows Gaming PC is to the Gaming Console.
Game developers are starting to release titles for Gaming Consoles first because the headaches of developing for Windows Gaming PC's lengthen development time. More people buy Gaming Consoles instead of Windows Gaming PC's simply because of the cost -- the same reason people buy Windows PC's instead of Macs.
More people stop using their Windows PC for gaming in favor of a Gaming Console because of the high cost of upgrades. Have you seen the cost of the NVidia 6800 video card? Who wants to spend $300-$800 per year in Windows Gaming PC upgrades???
The bottom line is, once someone negates your gaming argument, the article makes a lot of sense. What do you do on a Windows PC that you can't do on a Mac or Linux PC?
This is exactly why I switched from a Windows PC two years ago to a Mac, and I haven't gone back. The Mac just works, and it lets you work. And, for most of the reasons in the article, I switched my server from Windows 2000 Server to Linux. Linux just works, and never stops working from my point of view.