He quotes 90-110 RPM to be the "sweet spot" of cycling at which one can operate for hours
This of course has been known for many decades by cyclists and trainers etc(prior to that, lack of sufficient number of gears didn't allow for this knowledge to be acquired).
For those unfamiliar with the term, he believes that almost all bike laws and safety programs were manufactured not to provide for greater bicycle safety, but to keep bicyclists off the roads.
This has been well documented for 80-90 years, it's not a conspiracy theory. Henry Ford was of course involved in much of this in an effort to make his car(s) more attractive. In fact I've seen many mentions of this in modern history books which cited the specific laws.
While this book may be a good read, there's nothing here.
I'm still waiting for the gPod. That's what I call a sexy handheld.
This is of course a hoax. After all, if it were truly an Apple product, it would only have 1 button, because the average Apple gamer is not smart enough to use more than 1 (or at least thinks that).
I never saw "The Transformers Movie" in the 80's.....So not everything put out to kids is total and utter dreck.
The Transformer's movie wasn't aimed or marketed at kids, it was aimed at the teenagers and young adults that collected the toys. They purposely put in a swear word to get the higher rating, knowing that this would ensure that most kids would not see it (remember, in the 80s, the majority of parents were still keeping young kids from seeing anything that didn't have a G rating, and a PG rating actually meant something). Another thing that points to this was the music from the film which was definitely more mature than the cartoon series.
Also, the first half season of the cartoon show was much worse than the rest of the series. I'm not saying that the cartoon show was great TV, but it would be unfair to judge the series by the first episode.
Now if someone would do the same thing with computers/technology.
I know that I'm not the only one that gets sick everytime I see an actor "polishing" up an image by typing randomly onto the computer while looking at nothing but the image itself. Or someone hacking into a computer with 3 keystrokes.
I guess Hollywood thinks that most of the public are so mystified by computers that they'll believe anything.
Being 6' 2" I can assure you that it can be really bad. Most seats don't have enough leg room or even enough hip room for our larger bodies (FYI, I'm under 200 lbs, so it's not like I'm extra wide). The cheaper airlines like southwest give us even less room. The last time that I flew on them was just a quick 2 hour flight to Vegas and by the end of it I was feeling claustrophic (I don't normally have a problem with small places). I literally had to put my legs at an angle so that I could sit down and my knees were constantly pressed against the seat in front of me. The actual seat was too narrow and I felt like I was sitting in a child size chair. I've decided to never fly with them again.
I've had similar experiences with all of the major US domestic airlines when I fly in the states, the seats/seating arrangements are always too small for a tall person (I wouldn't know about first or business class, can't afford things like that). However I've had great experiences flying outside of North America. I've flown in 747s on Delta, Quantas and Air New Zealand. The Delta flights were reasonably comfortable, i.e. my knees didn't hit the seat in front of me and the seat was wide enough that the 8 hours was bearable. The Quantas and Air New Zealand flights were incredible. The legroom was more than I needed and the seat was wide enough that I had about 3-4 inches on either side of me. And of course their customer service was top notch, the flight personnel were friendly and always fast. I had similar experiences with the flight personnel with Air Fiji Hawaiian Air and Aloha Airline, seems that the airlines on that side of the world just care a bit more.
Someone else has already pointed out the airport modifications. But another key factor is a "installed base". Meaning, there are thousands of 747s out there being used right now, not just for passenger flights but also for cargo shipment. While it may be cheaper in the long run for companies to switch over to the Airbus or new Boeing, it's still a huge initial investment to buy these new planes. You'll notice how small the pre-sales are for both planes, nowhere near in the numbers to replace the existing 747 fleet. Until governments start to mandate using newer jets (which could happen since the 747 fleet will keep getting older and older and therefore less safe/reliable) the 747 will be around for a while longer. Granted it might only be 10-20 years, but that's still quite a long time.
BTW, if you're still hung up about the fuel economy etc of these new planes, just remember what happened to all the airlines after 2001. We saw how they operate almost day to day with their finances, so spending a huge chunk of change on a brand new fleet is probably out of reach of a lot of airlines.
I believe that the people of Iran are called Iranians (at least in Western English speaking countries), but there is not language called Iranian. In fact the most predominant language is Farsi, a Persian language. According to http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ ir.html#People
the languages spoken in Iran are:
Persian and Persian dialects 58%, Turkic and Turkic dialects 26%, Kurdish 9%, Luri 2%, Balochi 1%, Arabic 1%, Turkish 1%, other 2%
Granted the CIA might not be the least biased source of information, but they are nosey enough to probably have at least some of the facts right.
Lucas only had 6 episodes in mind when he pitched the idea to the movie studios (there are several good interviews with him on this subject on the various DVDs). I think the stories that you are referring to were written as novels by people that were licensed by the movie studio to produce "Star Wars" books.
OK, first of all, "fun" is relative. Saying that a game is not fun more often than not (and specifically in this case) is actually just saying that you don't find this type of game fun. There are many people that don't find FPS's or RTS's or Sim's fun, that doesn't make the type of game "not fun".
Secondly, you're mistaken about what an exploit is. An exploit is when you use a bug in the code to gain advantage. Using terrain isn't an exploit unless that specific type of terrain has a bug in it that grants an unfair advantage. In real world combat, terrain does provide advantages, i.e. hiding behind a rock and shooting a gun around it, sword fighting on uneven ground or choosing a bottleneck canyon. Where in the world did you come up with the idea that using a tree to protect your backside in a fight is an exploit?
BTW, back to the original post, I think this is a sad and pathetic move by Sony. It's only showing that they have absolutely no clue how to make a good MMO, so now that their new product is doing so poorly financially they're relying on cheap gimmicks to make money.
Right clicking and dragging a folder to bring up a context menu
Ahh that one's easy, simply hold down the alt, apple, control and F1, F7 and F12 keys while you drag the folder, then when you have it where you want it, repeat 3 times out loud "Steve Jobs is my Daddy" and then right click (oh, you didn't buy a mouse with a 2nd button when you bought the Mac? That would be because Apple has deemed all of it's users too stupid to use a 2nd button).
Seriously, what exactly does Google hope to accomplish by trying to keep a lid on this?
Are you asking what Google hopes to gain by NOT telling everyone how they detect the fraud? Are you serious? This is the exact same thing as a bank telling all of it's customers exactly how they detect fraud. Banks, governments etc never tell people "exactly" how they detect fraud and many other types of crimes. This would be telling the potential thieves, fraudists etc exactly how they can fool the institution. It would be like a rich person telling everyone how their alarm system works and all it's shortcomings, how to circumvent it etc. I have no clue where you got the idea that it's better for Google or really for anyone, if they were to tell us exactly how to they try to prevent this.
News flash, Google: the 'road map' is already out there, and being used to the tune of approximately 20% of all clicks on ads (stat from TFA).
Common sense says that your statement is not correct. If the 'road map' was out there, how would Google ever even know they were being frauded? They wouldn't because it would be "defeating" their tracking or surveillance strategy.
The secret is out...no one can gain by covering up the problem...no one, that is, but the people perpetrating the click fraud.
I don't think you quite understand what is going on here. They aren't keeping the lid on the fact that fraud is taking place (if they were, you wouldn't be reading TFA about it, duh). What they are being tight-lipped about is how they detect the fraud. And regardless of how much they are gaining by their strategy, they would be a complete loss if they told people how they detected (for instance, it might tell a company exactly what steps would fool their software/logs).
Google better do an about-face on this issue, and fast, before it winds up biting them on the ass even more than it has already.
Are you an out of work actor from a really bad sci-fi tv series or something? "do an about face" "news flash" "the secret is out", all sound like a bad plotline from some UPN show. Or perhaps do you have "sometime" employment with a company that is being sued by Google?
btw, I don't work for Google or any company that is associated, affiliated or even advertises with them. I just think this has to be one of the most pathetic posts that has been modded up in a while.
Homeworld was a beautiful game, but for some reason when you changed perspective it always made me nauseous. I have no idea why since I rarely get motion sick. But everytime I had to rotate or zoom the viewpoint, my stomach would flip over. Kept me from ever playing more than 5-15 mins. Every few weeks I'd go back and try it again only to wind up running to the bathroom if I played it for very long. Too bad, because it looked like a great game.
"So far so good. Now, reading over the last few emails you've replied to, it appears you have some trouble 'getting it up'. As a final verification, please confirm the date of your most recent order of Viagra"
No, as all three are something you "know" none of them touch on something you have, or something you are (have is like a token, are is like fingerprint, iris, biometrics)
So the computer could say request that you insert your floppy............ err nm.
So, your definition of a good OS is basically that it runs on an intel-esque box?!?
I wasn't saying that, I was just correcting the parent poster, who was making bad analogies from the grand-parent poster. If you're going to make a blanket statement based on a set of criteria, then you need to make sure that you meet the criteria (by you, I mean people in general and the parent poster of my original post specifically). OSX of course doesn't meet the criteria that the original poster had set forward. It's not that it's a bad OS, it's just that it doesn't meet the criteria being used.
Personally I think that architecture shouldn't really matter when speaking about things like this, but rather over all performance, ease of use, security etc.
Perhaps you didn't notice that I mentioned that I'm a Sun sysadmin, which of course means that my servers don't run on the x86 platform. In fact, I personally think that Sun/Solaris is a much better server combo than Intel/AMD/WinAnything. For a desktop, I'm afraid that OSX falls short of Windows in many ways, such as choice of applications. You could however argue that OSX wins out on ease of use over most OSes, but of course it was designed for the dumbest computer users (that's not a knock on the average Mac user, but that is Apple thinks of their users. After all, the reason that Macs originally only had 1 mouse button is because they believed that a regular person wasn't smart enough to use 2 mouse buttons).
I'm sorry, but I'm too much of a gamer to just boycott games until the publishers/producers start pumping out games designed specifically for Linux. While it's a great idea, I'm afraid that it won't work. I think that they won't start doing this until consumers start buying computers installed with Linux regularly. The executives and marketing/salespeople just don't see the potential yet because most Linux users either build their own machine or install Linux onto a manufacturers machine.
Personally I would love to completely drop windows, and gaming is the only reason I still have XP. However, that doesn't mean that I'm willing to start boycotting the latest/greatest games, or start buying big manu computers that are sans OS or have Linux installed (I like getting a total custom system without propietary hardware crap and for cheaper than a comparable system from a manu). I realize that makes me "part of the problem", but I don't feel strongly enough about this to make the sacrifice.
FYI, if you think this is a strange attitude, I should mention that the only reason I ever got into computers was because of gaming. I played games all the way through commodores, amigas, x86s. Warcraft 2 is of course what really threw me full on into the computer world and later the industry.
This article was obviously written after money changed hands between Ziff-Davis and Intel. It's so blatantly biased and full of half-truths and utter fluff. I can't believe anyone could read this article and not recognize it for it is.
This statement alone should have convinced you:
Although that might hurt the industry leader, Intel may draw comfort from the fact that it has already sold more 64-bit chips than the inventor of the x86-64 architecture, AMD.
How so? The 64 from AMD is a huge seller. How could they have done this? The Itanium was a no sell. The em64t isn't a real 64 bit processor, plus they've hardly sold any of them. Sounds to me like they're counting future sales of undelivered processors for the next year versus delivered, installed AMD 64 processors.
name one other company/organization that has released a world-class, brand new OS in the last decade that runs most of the world's servers and computers.
Apple (Mac OS X)
Your example does not meet the criteria. The qualifications were:
1. World Class 2. Brand new 3. Last decade 4. Runs most of the world's servers and/or 5. Runs most of the world's computers
Apple (Mac OS X)
1. World Class - well, that's debatable I suppose. My personal opinion having used it/supported it is quite different than yours apparently. 2. Brand new - not even close. Guts are borrowed from an old OS (BSD), which was borrowed from an even older OS (UNIX version-whoever-you-believe). Granted it does have some new things, but most are just repackaging of somebody else's ideas (much like MS actually). 3. Last decade - If you count the Unix/BSD/Mach guts, it's actually older than most Mac users. Granted you of course mean that the actual OS was bundled all up in the last decade, so you kind of have a point there. 4. Runs most of the world's servers - Not even close. You can take this statement 2 different ways: runs on most of the servers available and runs on the majority of the actual installed servers (i.e. most servers have it installed). Neither of these is true of OS X. It only runs on a few versions of a closed architecture, all of which are very similar and made by the same company. And it has an incredibly low installed base, especially on servers. 5. Runs most of the world's computers - considering that the percentage of macs to pcs is so low, there's no way this is true. In fact, there could even be an arguement made that Unix has a larger installed base on personal computers than OS X (there's probably no way to really fairly guage that since most statistics will be biased one way or another).
In short (or not so short), while your other example is probably more accurate to the statement than NT, OS X could not even be considered.I'm not attacking OS X or even supporting windows. Heck, I'm a Sun sysadmin, working for Sun's biggest competitor, starting to like Linux more than Solaris, writing this on an XP laptop:-). Hmmm, almost sounds like a weird, geeky episode of Ricky Lake or Maury.
Hmm, the article on CNN.com gives 2 possible reasons and states that they have not been able to determine what the cause is:
Engineers were perplexed and are trying to determine if there was a mistake putting the fuel on board the plane or if something happened within the first three hours of the flight, Virgin spokeswoman Lori Levin told CNN.
Ahh, I wish I had mod points. The gp needs to be modded down, it meets the criteria for a troll or flamebait comment. The parent is spot on. Comparing an Apple XServe to a Sun AnyServer is truly like comparing apples to oranges.
The gp reads more like a form letter than an original thought.
Just been wondering about this...Is there a pro-Apple forum out there where the posters use their pretty little shavers, I mean Macs, to compose random form letters to post onto Slashdot articles that have no relevance to the topic.
While I am sure that those XServe's look much prettier next to a nice floral arrangement or a modernistic "authentic" Indian Sandpainting (made in China), they are not intended, designed or in any way capable of performing on par to real midrange servers.
Haven't these scientists ever watched an episode of the X-Files? You NEVER thaw out anything that you find in ice. Or touch any mysterious black oil spots in a hole in Texas. Or stay in a small town in the forests of Colorado. Or visit a logging camp in Oregon. Or.....well you get the idea.
Slashdot Mirror
He quotes 90-110 RPM to be the "sweet spot" of cycling at which one can operate for hours
This of course has been known for many decades by cyclists and trainers etc(prior to that, lack of sufficient number of gears didn't allow for this knowledge to be acquired).
For those unfamiliar with the term, he believes that almost all bike laws and safety programs were manufactured not to provide for greater bicycle safety, but to keep bicyclists off the roads.
This has been well documented for 80-90 years, it's not a conspiracy theory. Henry Ford was of course involved in much of this in an effort to make his car(s) more attractive. In fact I've seen many mentions of this in modern history books which cited the specific laws.
While this book may be a good read, there's nothing here.
I'm still waiting for the gPod. That's what I call a sexy handheld.
This is of course a hoax. After all, if it were truly an Apple product, it would only have 1 button, because the average Apple gamer is not smart enough to use more than 1 (or at least thinks that).
I never saw "The Transformers Movie" in the 80's.....So not everything put out to kids is total and utter dreck.
The Transformer's movie wasn't aimed or marketed at kids, it was aimed at the teenagers and young adults that collected the toys. They purposely put in a swear word to get the higher rating, knowing that this would ensure that most kids would not see it (remember, in the 80s, the majority of parents were still keeping young kids from seeing anything that didn't have a G rating, and a PG rating actually meant something). Another thing that points to this was the music from the film which was definitely more mature than the cartoon series.
Also, the first half season of the cartoon show was much worse than the rest of the series. I'm not saying that the cartoon show was great TV, but it would be unfair to judge the series by the first episode.
Now if someone would do the same thing with computers/technology.
I know that I'm not the only one that gets sick everytime I see an actor "polishing" up an image by typing randomly onto the computer while looking at nothing but the image itself. Or someone hacking into a computer with 3 keystrokes.
I guess Hollywood thinks that most of the public are so mystified by computers that they'll believe anything.
Being 6' 2" I can assure you that it can be really bad. Most seats don't have enough leg room or even enough hip room for our larger bodies (FYI, I'm under 200 lbs, so it's not like I'm extra wide). The cheaper airlines like southwest give us even less room. The last time that I flew on them was just a quick 2 hour flight to Vegas and by the end of it I was feeling claustrophic (I don't normally have a problem with small places). I literally had to put my legs at an angle so that I could sit down and my knees were constantly pressed against the seat in front of me. The actual seat was too narrow and I felt like I was sitting in a child size chair. I've decided to never fly with them again.
I've had similar experiences with all of the major US domestic airlines when I fly in the states, the seats/seating arrangements are always too small for a tall person (I wouldn't know about first or business class, can't afford things like that). However I've had great experiences flying outside of North America. I've flown in 747s on Delta, Quantas and Air New Zealand. The Delta flights were reasonably comfortable, i.e. my knees didn't hit the seat in front of me and the seat was wide enough that the 8 hours was bearable. The Quantas and Air New Zealand flights were incredible. The legroom was more than I needed and the seat was wide enough that I had about 3-4 inches on either side of me. And of course their customer service was top notch, the flight personnel were friendly and always fast. I had similar experiences with the flight personnel with Air Fiji Hawaiian Air and Aloha Airline, seems that the airlines on that side of the world just care a bit more.
Someone else has already pointed out the airport modifications. But another key factor is a "installed base". Meaning, there are thousands of 747s out there being used right now, not just for passenger flights but also for cargo shipment. While it may be cheaper in the long run for companies to switch over to the Airbus or new Boeing, it's still a huge initial investment to buy these new planes. You'll notice how small the pre-sales are for both planes, nowhere near in the numbers to replace the existing 747 fleet. Until governments start to mandate using newer jets (which could happen since the 747 fleet will keep getting older and older and therefore less safe/reliable) the 747 will be around for a while longer. Granted it might only be 10-20 years, but that's still quite a long time.
BTW, if you're still hung up about the fuel economy etc of these new planes, just remember what happened to all the airlines after 2001. We saw how they operate almost day to day with their finances, so spending a huge chunk of change on a brand new fleet is probably out of reach of a lot of airlines.
I believe that the people of Iran are called Iranians (at least in Western English speaking countries), but there is not language called Iranian. In fact the most predominant language is Farsi, a Persian language. According to http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ ir.html#People
the languages spoken in Iran are:
Persian and Persian dialects 58%, Turkic and Turkic dialects 26%, Kurdish 9%, Luri 2%, Balochi 1%, Arabic 1%, Turkish 1%, other 2%
Granted the CIA might not be the least biased source of information, but they are nosey enough to probably have at least some of the facts right.
Lucas only had 6 episodes in mind when he pitched the idea to the movie studios (there are several good interviews with him on this subject on the various DVDs). I think the stories that you are referring to were written as novels by people that were licensed by the movie studio to produce "Star Wars" books.
OK, first of all, "fun" is relative. Saying that a game is not fun more often than not (and specifically in this case) is actually just saying that you don't find this type of game fun. There are many people that don't find FPS's or RTS's or Sim's fun, that doesn't make the type of game "not fun".
Secondly, you're mistaken about what an exploit is. An exploit is when you use a bug in the code to gain advantage. Using terrain isn't an exploit unless that specific type of terrain has a bug in it that grants an unfair advantage. In real world combat, terrain does provide advantages, i.e. hiding behind a rock and shooting a gun around it, sword fighting on uneven ground or choosing a bottleneck canyon. Where in the world did you come up with the idea that using a tree to protect your backside in a fight is an exploit?
BTW, back to the original post, I think this is a sad and pathetic move by Sony. It's only showing that they have absolutely no clue how to make a good MMO, so now that their new product is doing so poorly financially they're relying on cheap gimmicks to make money.
Right clicking and dragging a folder to bring up a context menu
Ahh that one's easy, simply hold down the alt, apple, control and F1, F7 and F12 keys while you drag the folder, then when you have it where you want it, repeat 3 times out loud "Steve Jobs is my Daddy" and then right click (oh, you didn't buy a mouse with a 2nd button when you bought the Mac? That would be because Apple has deemed all of it's users too stupid to use a 2nd button).
Seriously, what exactly does Google hope to accomplish by trying to keep a lid on this?
Are you asking what Google hopes to gain by NOT telling everyone how they detect the fraud? Are you serious? This is the exact same thing as a bank telling all of it's customers exactly how they detect fraud. Banks, governments etc never tell people "exactly" how they detect fraud and many other types of crimes. This would be telling the potential thieves, fraudists etc exactly how they can fool the institution. It would be like a rich person telling everyone how their alarm system works and all it's shortcomings, how to circumvent it etc. I have no clue where you got the idea that it's better for Google or really for anyone, if they were to tell us exactly how to they try to prevent this.
News flash, Google: the 'road map' is already out there, and being used to the tune of approximately 20% of all clicks on ads (stat from TFA).
Common sense says that your statement is not correct. If the 'road map' was out there, how would Google ever even know they were being frauded? They wouldn't because it would be "defeating" their tracking or surveillance strategy.
The secret is out...no one can gain by covering up the problem...no one, that is, but the people perpetrating the click fraud.
I don't think you quite understand what is going on here. They aren't keeping the lid on the fact that fraud is taking place (if they were, you wouldn't be reading TFA about it, duh). What they are being tight-lipped about is how they detect the fraud. And regardless of how much they are gaining by their strategy, they would be a complete loss if they told people how they detected (for instance, it might tell a company exactly what steps would fool their software/logs).
Google better do an about-face on this issue, and fast, before it winds up biting them on the ass even more than it has already.
Are you an out of work actor from a really bad sci-fi tv series or something? "do an about face" "news flash" "the secret is out", all sound like a bad plotline from some UPN show. Or perhaps do you have "sometime" employment with a company that is being sued by Google?
btw, I don't work for Google or any company that is associated, affiliated or even advertises with them. I just think this has to be one of the most pathetic posts that has been modded up in a while.
It was the Monty Python skit "Spanish Inquisition". http://people.csail.mit.edu/people/paulfitz/spanis h/script.html
Homeworld was a beautiful game, but for some reason when you changed perspective it always made me nauseous. I have no idea why since I rarely get motion sick. But everytime I had to rotate or zoom the viewpoint, my stomach would flip over. Kept me from ever playing more than 5-15 mins. Every few weeks I'd go back and try it again only to wind up running to the bathroom if I played it for very long. Too bad, because it looked like a great game.
Which of course has already been made into a movie "The 13th Warrior" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0120657/.
Which of course has nothing to the do with the story or anything else, just purely an aside.
So what you're saying is that Macs are the Atari 2600s of the computer industry. Finally, I understand the Mac Mindset.
"So far so good. Now, reading over the last few emails you've replied to, it appears you have some trouble 'getting it up'. As a final verification, please confirm the date of your most recent order of Viagra"
............ err nm.
No, as all three are something you "know" none of them touch on something you have, or something you are (have is like a token, are is like fingerprint, iris, biometrics)
So the computer could say request that you insert your floppy
So, your definition of a good OS is basically that it runs on an intel-esque box?!?
I wasn't saying that, I was just correcting the parent poster, who was making bad analogies from the grand-parent poster. If you're going to make a blanket statement based on a set of criteria, then you need to make sure that you meet the criteria (by you, I mean people in general and the parent poster of my original post specifically). OSX of course doesn't meet the criteria that the original poster had set forward. It's not that it's a bad OS, it's just that it doesn't meet the criteria being used.
Personally I think that architecture shouldn't really matter when speaking about things like this, but rather over all performance, ease of use, security etc.
Perhaps you didn't notice that I mentioned that I'm a Sun sysadmin, which of course means that my servers don't run on the x86 platform. In fact, I personally think that Sun/Solaris is a much better server combo than Intel/AMD/WinAnything. For a desktop, I'm afraid that OSX falls short of Windows in many ways, such as choice of applications. You could however argue that OSX wins out on ease of use over most OSes, but of course it was designed for the dumbest computer users (that's not a knock on the average Mac user, but that is Apple thinks of their users. After all, the reason that Macs originally only had 1 mouse button is because they believed that a regular person wasn't smart enough to use 2 mouse buttons).
I'm sorry, but I'm too much of a gamer to just boycott games until the publishers/producers start pumping out games designed specifically for Linux. While it's a great idea, I'm afraid that it won't work. I think that they won't start doing this until consumers start buying computers installed with Linux regularly. The executives and marketing/salespeople just don't see the potential yet because most Linux users either build their own machine or install Linux onto a manufacturers machine.
Personally I would love to completely drop windows, and gaming is the only reason I still have XP. However, that doesn't mean that I'm willing to start boycotting the latest/greatest games, or start buying big manu computers that are sans OS or have Linux installed (I like getting a total custom system without propietary hardware crap and for cheaper than a comparable system from a manu). I realize that makes me "part of the problem", but I don't feel strongly enough about this to make the sacrifice.
FYI, if you think this is a strange attitude, I should mention that the only reason I ever got into computers was because of gaming. I played games all the way through commodores, amigas, x86s. Warcraft 2 is of course what really threw me full on into the computer world and later the industry.
This article was obviously written after money changed hands between Ziff-Davis and Intel. It's so blatantly biased and full of half-truths and utter fluff. I can't believe anyone could read this article and not recognize it for it is.
This statement alone should have convinced you:
Although that might hurt the industry leader, Intel may draw comfort from the fact that it has already sold more 64-bit chips than the inventor of the x86-64 architecture, AMD.
How so? The 64 from AMD is a huge seller. How could they have done this? The Itanium was a no sell. The em64t isn't a real 64 bit processor, plus they've hardly sold any of them. Sounds to me like they're counting future sales of undelivered processors for the next year versus delivered, installed AMD 64 processors.
name one other company/organization that has released a world-class, brand new OS in the last decade that runs most of the world's servers and computers.
:-). Hmmm, almost sounds like a weird, geeky episode of Ricky Lake or Maury.
Apple (Mac OS X)
Your example does not meet the criteria. The qualifications were:
1. World Class
2. Brand new
3. Last decade
4. Runs most of the world's servers
and/or
5. Runs most of the world's computers
Apple (Mac OS X)
1. World Class - well, that's debatable I suppose. My personal opinion having used it/supported it is quite different than yours apparently.
2. Brand new - not even close. Guts are borrowed from an old OS (BSD), which was borrowed from an even older OS (UNIX version-whoever-you-believe). Granted it does have some new things, but most are just repackaging of somebody else's ideas (much like MS actually).
3. Last decade - If you count the Unix/BSD/Mach guts, it's actually older than most Mac users. Granted you of course mean that the actual OS was bundled all up in the last decade, so you kind of have a point there.
4. Runs most of the world's servers - Not even close. You can take this statement 2 different ways: runs on most of the servers available and runs on the majority of the actual installed servers (i.e. most servers have it installed). Neither of these is true of OS X. It only runs on a few versions of a closed architecture, all of which are very similar and made by the same company. And it has an incredibly low installed base, especially on servers.
5. Runs most of the world's computers - considering that the percentage of macs to pcs is so low, there's no way this is true. In fact, there could even be an arguement made that Unix has a larger installed base on personal computers than OS X (there's probably no way to really fairly guage that since most statistics will be biased one way or another).
In short (or not so short), while your other example is probably more accurate to the statement than NT, OS X could not even be considered.I'm not attacking OS X or even supporting windows. Heck, I'm a Sun sysadmin, working for Sun's biggest competitor, starting to like Linux more than Solaris, writing this on an XP laptop
because of those damn dirty blue people.
ooh I hate those blue people with their secret blue handshakes....
Hmm, the article on CNN.com gives 2 possible reasons and states that they have not been able to determine what the cause is:
s sett/index.html
Engineers were perplexed and are trying to determine if there was a mistake putting the fuel on board the plane or if something happened within the first three hours of the flight, Virgin spokeswoman Lori Levin told CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/03/02/globalflyer.fo
The article also mentions
Back-up sensors to the fuel gauge indicate the Virgin Atlantic GlobalFlyer has 2,600 pounds less fuel than expected
So not exactly the fuel guage.
Ahh, I wish I had mod points. The gp needs to be modded down, it meets the criteria for a troll or flamebait comment. The parent is spot on. Comparing an Apple XServe to a Sun AnyServer is truly like comparing apples to oranges.
The gp reads more like a form letter than an original thought.
Just been wondering about this...Is there a pro-Apple forum out there where the posters use their pretty little shavers, I mean Macs, to compose random form letters to post onto Slashdot articles that have no relevance to the topic.
While I am sure that those XServe's look much prettier next to a nice floral arrangement or a modernistic "authentic" Indian Sandpainting (made in China), they are not intended, designed or in any way capable of performing on par to real midrange servers.
Haven't these scientists ever watched an episode of the X-Files? You NEVER thaw out anything that you find in ice. Or touch any mysterious black oil spots in a hole in Texas. Or stay in a small town in the forests of Colorado. Or visit a logging camp in Oregon. Or.....well you get the idea.
Both companies stock price is up on the rumor.
1. Pay Apple $$$ for new iStock service.
2. Apple spreads "rumors" of a buyout
3. Stock prices go up.
4. ???
5. Profit