They only test one resolution, 1600*1200! Maybe it's just me, but I don't see a lot of laptops with 1600* resolution. The whole review is only meant to make the card look bad, it doesn't take into consideration price, power/heat consumption, or other important factors. It is biased, shallow and not worthy of a/.ing!
A) Why do you think this is for laptops only? Not that it matters, cause you don't often change the video card on your laptop..
B) I agree the whole review stays away from the whole "calm objectivity" range of emotions. Face it, the reviewer was pretty upset about the poor showing, having expected better
With its spec sheet and clock rates, we were looking forward to testing the XP4 - we hoped it would make things interesting in the GPU arena. But from out[sic] test results, the XP4 is dead on arrival.
C) The article does take price into consideration:
Even if XP4-based boards can substantially undercut the Radeon 9000 Pro on price, the woefully inadequate performance won't justify any amount of savings. Its 3D performance across the board is simply unacceptable versus present-day competition.
So you are now trying to say that:
redundancy *increases* availability which is perfectly clear, yet you also say that: rather than having two equally unreliable networks, create a mroe reliable network, with rendundant backups for availability. which is again unclear;) Redundant backups as in a completely identical network, or using common parts throughout the network and have a small number of spares that can swap in to replace HW issues?
In a hospital setting, availability is paramount to other concerns, but they're going to incur more than twice the management costs by doubling the same network.
I disagree with you here. You think that if I have twice as much equipment to manage, I need twice as many people to do the management?
Lastly, I think you are overlooking the point that in this particular instance, a completely redundant network would have alleviated the days of recovery.
That said, I agree with your intention of suggesting throwing more brains rather than devices to solve these types of problems.
This system wasn't designed for that. This one was, though. Cheaper, very effective, and nice maps you can bring up to check on where your car is (good for teenage kids, no?) Also, no external way of telling that the car has this installed and they have good connections with Law Enforcement (They claim normal vehicle recovery time is under 15 minutes)
But citing a devlopment issue as the reason for pulling the plug just before launch wouldn't fall into any of these categories.
That is correct, however I was only trying to site good business reasons for killing a product just before launch. It happens all the time by the way.
Here is a scenario (pure conjecture) that passes muster as far as "development issues" are concerned and shows good business sense.
During the development of this handset Sendo had to make one accomodation after another on the "useability" of the handset due to OS constrains.
Each one was maybe not so great and each something they felt they could live with. Now they have finally made a few prototypes and have put them in the hands of real users. The uses gave the product failing grades and cites in most of the cases issues that Sendo felt was attributed to the Trade-off's they had to make vis a vis MS and their OS.
This seems to me to be a fairly normal slipperly slope. I completely agree with you on this point.
Consequently the product gets cancelled. Now who and what would you "blame" if blame has to be portioned out?
At some point, yes, you decide to cut off the project. However, the interesting point is the timing. If there is a finger, the finger should be pointing at the liason between Sento and Microsoft. From my interpretation (and this may be wrong, and thus why I'm irked by the whole this), the product was far enough in the development cycle, and Microsoft should have been able to design/support a system what with CE experience, etc.
The timing of just before release (not product announcement, mind you) signifies that there where issues that were unresolvable in the prototype and alpha stages that were allowed through because of, I'm sure,various assurances by MS that finally Sento didn't believe.
My gut tells me that the final reason Sento pulled out was that they needed to support the final product and MS has too large of a grip on that angle. Any problem of this type should have been resolved many moons ago, not just before launch.
I'm not trying to blame, I'm just saying that with a technology product, generally the only thing that is going to prevent launch (*especially* with a chance of first to market) is going to be a negative market reaction. Surely there shouldn't be a technological issue this late in the game that is the equivalent of 'Oh, actually, we can't do that'
I truly hope the real reason is one of disagreement on support of ongoing development (i.e. political instead of technological) or the like. I think my only beef is, as I said, citing a development issue.
But citing a devlopment issue as the reason for pulling the plug just before launch wouldn't fall into any of these categories. That decision would have to have been made many months before.
Thus the question regarding the business minds at work. Now if either of your reasons were true regarding final justification of pulling the plug, then why mention Microsoft at all?
Spell checkers can't help with there, their, they're and they don't help me when I btucher a word so badly that it can't tell what I'm trying to say, which is more often then not.
More important than correcting you with the right spelling is pointing out that some particular word is unknown/butchered. Spell checkers shouldn't replace knowledge, but point out the (all too human) mistakes.
Every word in this sentence is a gross mispelling of the word tommattoe.
First of all, the USPS functions with massive subsidies from the government, as well as with increases in postage that outstrip inflation.
Take your head out of your ass and compare the USPS with something instead of what you *think* should be reality. Of course it is gov't subsidized, it is critical to the US infrastructure. Is there a comparable private company that can handle the sheer volume that is comparable in price? The only thing I see is FedEx and similar, which when comparing sending a 10lb package 3000 miles is a grossly more expensive. Yet you are complaining about the postage increase and the fact that it is growing more than inflation of all things. Obviously you feel that there is no other reasons for such an increase (such as volume). If a private company were to take over the USPS's business, would it follow the USPS model (backed by the Gov't, good service) or would it follow the DSL/Cable (sorry we don't serve that area) idealogy?
Second, I see plenty of standards in place already on the internet; TCP/IP? HTTP? FTP? Even with wireless there are standards in place. We don't need a government with a proven track record of screwing things up to meddle even more.
These are Internet standards. Other standards do exist. For instance, who is going to guarantee that if a tier 1 ISP closes it's doors that there will not be a major impact on Internet usage? Certainly not other Tier 1's or even smaller ISPs since they are actively trying to PREVENT more bandwidth across their wire.
Finally, comparing the state of cellular affairs in a country such as the US (which is where cellular technology got it's start) and anywhere else (which had the benefit of learning from our mistakes) is ludicrous. In Europe, a poster child for an excellent mobile system, there are still multiple providers, each with their own spectrum and equipment.
Europe has an interesting geographic reason for being ahead. As a cellular provider decided to go into a country, it was economically possible to cover the ENTIRE country. It takes a massive effort for a Cell provider to have a decent coverage (which is why most providers started small) and expecting them to not cooperate and figure out a way to share bandwidth effectively is asking for a hike in your bill.
As for your comment about Lake and Cook counties, I'm not sure what they are, but based on your record with this posting, I'm guessing you're wrong about that as well.
That's because you didn't see the sig of the parent post I was responding to. No fault of your own for being oblivious.
Take the post office. Tremendous infrastructure, and tremendous service. You can mail a sizable letter from almost anywhere to almost anywhere for pennies.
Yes, implementing a WiFi infrastructure might be done cheaper, more scalable, etc, but compare to the NSF and the current Internet. The NSF put in the standards, and by implementing them, made the standards change je jure become de facto.
Look at all the different cell phone systems we have available to us... pretty great, huh? Except that they are incompatible with each other, have different coverages, and infrastructure is at least tripled to accomadate different standards without tripling the bandwidth.
I think competition is a great thing.. once you have standards in place, not as a knee-jerk reaction to getting the job done best.
Specifically C# and VB.NET compile down to exactly the same code, however not all languages are as isomorphic. I suggest that the C# and J# implementations under.NET are significantly different, and I would imagine that C# would come out faster in the end (flagship language and all that)
I appreciate your lengthy response. Let me admit that I have quite a few clients, all who use windows on the desktop. Now, this is due to that facts that you mentioned, namely questionable business practices, copying inventiveness, etc. However, undoubtedly it is the case that the majority of third-party business software vendors supports Windows and some other OS (for instance, Reuters Bridgestation supports Windows and Solaris), the upshot is that the intersection of these products is to have windows and MS Office on the desktop.
I think that MS does a pretty good job with their desktop environments. Remembering that the average IQ is 100, and that there are a LOT of useless users out there who couldn't even make a switch over to OS X without incredible headaches (for me and them). With this in mind, I think the best solution is to have rock solid servers in place (Exchange as mentioned many times previously breaks hard when it does break, it should have been ported to SQL server instead of JET long ago). Now, it is fun to look around and see all the solutions to these server issues: Samba, Apache, [mail MTA's aplenty], ip/ipfw/ipfilter/ipchains, etc. It would be very nice to be able to drop in server(s) to replace windows servers.
When the markets stabilize into some new form, I think there is little chance that Microsoft will resemble what they are now. They will have much smaller profit margins and will certainly not be in a position to bully OEMs and squash smaller competitors. Then, new companies, in the spirit of Be, will be on a more level playing field with a real chance of success. I look forward to this future.
Agreed. But Microsoft will never reach a point where there is going to be a major crash. The company has historically been very agile in terms of breaking into new markets. I also think that there is a lot more to MS than the perceived software box at Fry's and a support number. They make a decent living as consultants, too. (note: check the revenue model at Oracle, about 75% comes from consulting, with the rest in software/DB). Yes, MS will not resemble what they are now, but I dont' think Bill has it in him to roll over. Would everyone hate MS if they had played fairly (i.e. let a good product live or die on its own merits) or is this view predominate against large companies (back to the comparison to IBM of the 80's)
I think that more and more you will find Microsoft products coming out that continue to meet expectations (like the new CMS they bought--err are developing) and the fact remains: The cost of buying MS although larger than advertised, is such a drop in the bucket. My clients don't want another OS, they just want what they have to work, and it isn't that hard to do, really... it just takes more than putting in a CD and default installation
Lastly, until there is a *respected* well known distributor for Linux, companies like Dell will not sell it, and companies will not buy it. The Microsoft stranglehold will hold true until (this is my prophesy) there is a single standardized distribution and they have a profitable business model. Some companies don't think it is a good deal to get something for free.. they're businessmen, they are trying to figure out who is screwing them when they are busy screwing other people. The mindset is not in the place where they will accept something for nothing.
I have to agree with your dissentor.. I've been able to many times have scalable and stable Exchange environments. I've also seen Unix boxes that crapped out. Any time you have failures (both windows and Unix worlds) it is either for faulty/underpowered hardware, or imperfect configuration.
Seriously, what platform would that be? Are you referring to Windows? What about MS Office for OS X? Or are you referring to their commitment to the Xbox? Ok, that last was a stab at MS.
and this article could be related to the Biblically documented mutation from the tower of Babel (of course then you'd have to accept the existence and interference of God)
Sure, the mutation could be an interference from God, but not according to Christian Scientists, because genes doesn't matter. God created us in His image and nothing has changed since then.
Why is the Babel story being considered a mutation? Does that mean that I need some kind of special genes to speak different languages? Or are you both simply clueless and want to argue theology instead of reality?
By your statement, are you trying to indicate that the word "Know" is somehow a flaw in his argument? How do you KNOW that you are even alive? GOD didn't tell you, and it certainly doesn't say so in the Bible or any other writings of significance. Disregarding the human ability to gain knowledge by looking at their surroundings denies them the right to be human...
If Evolution is possible, then where are the fossils from all of the missing links between evolutionary stages?
What do you call fossils such as Neanderthal, Homo-habilis, homo-erectus, even Lucy? These are quite obviously the "missing" links that you quite explicitly state do not exist.
Isn't it an amazing coincidence that all of humanity is on the same level of evolution? Shouldn't at least some of us be a few millennia behind others? And primitive cultures don't apply, I am talking physical, not social development.
Why would you think that all cultures arise independantly? Isn't it most logical (and also biblical) that man spread across the planet? BUT, since you bring it up, why not take "primitive" peoples into account. Take the pygmy's or the fact that different cultures have different average heights (compare Norwegians and Mexicans, for instance)
I can't prove that you don't have a high IQ, but that doesn't mean you have one.
I'm pretty sure that if he had a time machine he would offer to fund a young Mr. Gates, and I can't think of a single Open Source "idealist" who wouldn't do the same.
And though your sentiment is in the right place -- corporate leaders bending ethics all over the place and putting bottom line first over everything and likely that is the basis for Mr. Hardt stepping down -- your post did make you sound like an idiot.
It's "ala" not "al la"
The domino analogy signifies companies that are poised and ready to be swayed, not grounded in ethics, thus why does this surprise you so?
It should be "It's" instead of "Its"
Which companies over the last few months have been suing each other for stealing software? I missed that and find that kind of reading interesting
What is it that you do that keeps your shit so clean? Is there a problem with wanting something other than a Geo? Environmentally safer cars don't come cheap, you know.
This is why the US has BILLIONS to give to nations crippled by socialism and communism.
Assuming the US actually has that money in the first place. The US currently has a budget deficit measured in the trillions of dollers. Also the first time I have heard Israel described as "crippled by socialism and communism."
If I take out a line of credit from my bank and give you money, am I not actually giving you money? What is the debt ratio of other countries that makes you cringe so? Or is it merely the size of the national debt and deficit?
This is why any time there is a problem in the Middle East, the World looks to the US.
Not usually to provide money, probably more often top stop providing money.
Except that your view is a little narrow.. see this site regarding humanitarian relief. Now, if you are talking NON-humanitarian funding (such as small and large arms out to Israel) then yeah, point well taken.
hrmmmm... found these interesting numbers at USAID: US humanitarian aid is hovering around USD$8,000,000,000 + 9,000,000,000 + 1,500,000,000 + $24,000,000,000 = $42,000,000,000 (yes, 42 Billion) of which 5 Billion is military assistance. This does not include any military budgets as obviously that is top secret or something rediculous like that.
You know, it escapes me as to the actual reason. I came across this during a conversation at the Microsoft Redmond campus when I was building out a QA datacenter. The argument went along the lines of software depreciation... hmmm [googling] see this article, specifically that software can be depreciated over three years privided that In order to be depreciable, the property has to have a useful life of more than one year.
I can't say I understand it myself, but apparently the cost associated with a product purchase versus leasing for three years with depreciation is beneficial to the lesee. In addition, there is a (somewhat) fixed cost of ownership regarding hardware and software since the average desktop hardware gets replaced coincident to the three years. And accountants like to have these types of plans. The crux is that Microsoft software really doesn't have a three year lifespan, especially if you want all your MS programs current, which is provided for in the lease.
Slashdot Mirror
B) I agree the whole review stays away from the whole "calm objectivity" range of emotions. Face it, the reviewer was pretty upset about the poor showing, having expected better
C) The article does take price into consideration:
Lastly, I think you are overlooking the point that in this particular instance, a completely redundant network would have alleviated the days of recovery.
That said, I agree with your intention of suggesting throwing more brains rather than devices to solve these types of problems.
This system wasn't designed for that. This one was, though. Cheaper, very effective, and nice maps you can bring up to check on where your car is (good for teenage kids, no?) Also, no external way of telling that the car has this installed and they have good connections with Law Enforcement (They claim normal vehicle recovery time is under 15 minutes)
If I copied a CD of the Back Street Boys, I will be laughing the entire time, and be laughed at. I believe that would fall under parody laws ;)
The timing of just before release (not product announcement, mind you) signifies that there where issues that were unresolvable in the prototype and alpha stages that were allowed through because of, I'm sure,various assurances by MS that finally Sento didn't believe.
My gut tells me that the final reason Sento pulled out was that they needed to support the final product and MS has too large of a grip on that angle. Any problem of this type should have been resolved many moons ago, not just before launch.
I'm not trying to blame, I'm just saying that with a technology product, generally the only thing that is going to prevent launch (*especially* with a chance of first to market) is going to be a negative market reaction. Surely there shouldn't be a technological issue this late in the game that is the equivalent of 'Oh, actually, we can't do that'
I truly hope the real reason is one of disagreement on support of ongoing development (i.e. political instead of technological) or the like. I think my only beef is, as I said, citing a development issue.
Thus the question regarding the business minds at work. Now if either of your reasons were true regarding final justification of pulling the plug, then why mention Microsoft at all?
You can walk into a bank in Europe with no affiliation with the one that has your money and withdraw funds?
More important than correcting you with the right spelling is pointing out that some particular word is unknown/butchered. Spell checkers shouldn't replace knowledge, but point out the (all too human) mistakes.
Every word in this sentence is a gross mispelling of the word tommattoe.
Yes, implementing a WiFi infrastructure might be done cheaper, more scalable, etc, but compare to the NSF and the current Internet. The NSF put in the standards, and by implementing them, made the standards change je jure become de facto.
Look at all the different cell phone systems we have available to us... pretty great, huh? Except that they are incompatible with each other, have different coverages, and infrastructure is at least tripled to accomadate different standards without tripling the bandwidth.
I think competition is a great thing.. once you have standards in place, not as a knee-jerk reaction to getting the job done best.
Also, Cook county kicks Lake county's ass.
Specifically C# and VB.NET compile down to exactly the same code, however not all languages are as isomorphic. I suggest that the C# and J# implementations under .NET are significantly different, and I would imagine that C# would come out faster in the end (flagship language and all that)
I think that MS does a pretty good job with their desktop environments. Remembering that the average IQ is 100, and that there are a LOT of useless users out there who couldn't even make a switch over to OS X without incredible headaches (for me and them). With this in mind, I think the best solution is to have rock solid servers in place (Exchange as mentioned many times previously breaks hard when it does break, it should have been ported to SQL server instead of JET long ago). Now, it is fun to look around and see all the solutions to these server issues: Samba, Apache, [mail MTA's aplenty], ip/ipfw/ipfilter/ipchains, etc. It would be very nice to be able to drop in server(s) to replace windows servers.
When the markets stabilize into some new form, I think there is little chance that Microsoft will resemble what they are now. They will have much smaller profit margins and will certainly not be in a position to bully OEMs and squash smaller competitors. Then, new companies, in the spirit of Be, will be on a more level playing field with a real chance of success. I look forward to this future.
Agreed. But Microsoft will never reach a point where there is going to be a major crash. The company has historically been very agile in terms of breaking into new markets. I also think that there is a lot more to MS than the perceived software box at Fry's and a support number. They make a decent living as consultants, too. (note: check the revenue model at Oracle, about 75% comes from consulting, with the rest in software/DB). Yes, MS will not resemble what they are now, but I dont' think Bill has it in him to roll over. Would everyone hate MS if they had played fairly (i.e. let a good product live or die on its own merits) or is this view predominate against large companies (back to the comparison to IBM of the 80's)
I think that more and more you will find Microsoft products coming out that continue to meet expectations (like the new CMS they bought--err are developing) and the fact remains: The cost of buying MS although larger than advertised, is such a drop in the bucket. My clients don't want another OS, they just want what they have to work, and it isn't that hard to do, really... it just takes more than putting in a CD and default installation
Lastly, until there is a *respected* well known distributor for Linux, companies like Dell will not sell it, and companies will not buy it. The Microsoft stranglehold will hold true until (this is my prophesy) there is a single standardized distribution and they have a profitable business model. Some companies don't think it is a good deal to get something for free.. they're businessmen, they are trying to figure out who is screwing them when they are busy screwing other people. The mindset is not in the place where they will accept something for nothing.
--paul
I have to agree with your dissentor.. I've been able to many times have scalable and stable Exchange environments. I've also seen Unix boxes that crapped out. Any time you have failures (both windows and Unix worlds) it is either for faulty/underpowered hardware, or imperfect configuration.
Seriously, what platform would that be? Are you referring to Windows? What about MS Office for OS X? Or are you referring to their commitment to the Xbox? Ok, that last was a stab at MS.
You know, I saw SRA and my mind melded NSA and NRA. This of course brings a host of jokes to mind:
The bullet-proof Linux
New gun-toting "hick" Linux with new rot-13 crypto
The linux of a new militia, runs Apache, Camanche, kill || die
sigh, all this flashed through my head.. must stop drinking coffee. . .
Seriously though, everyone can speak to God except you, he says that you smell weird.
Here Here! Good response. Except for the last sentence regarding a subtle hint from God. Better to have stuck with the Hebrews.
Sure, the mutation could be an interference from God, but not according to Christian Scientists, because genes doesn't matter. God created us in His image and nothing has changed since then.
Why is the Babel story being considered a mutation? Does that mean that I need some kind of special genes to speak different languages? Or are you both simply clueless and want to argue theology instead of reality?
That said, you are an idiot, and this I KNOW.
What do you call fossils such as Neanderthal, Homo-habilis, homo-erectus, even Lucy? These are quite obviously the "missing" links that you quite explicitly state do not exist.
Isn't it an amazing coincidence that all of humanity is on the same level of evolution? Shouldn't at least some of us be a few millennia behind others? And primitive cultures don't apply, I am talking physical, not social development.
Why would you think that all cultures arise independantly? Isn't it most logical (and also biblical) that man spread across the planet? BUT, since you bring it up, why not take "primitive" peoples into account. Take the pygmy's or the fact that different cultures have different average heights (compare Norwegians and Mexicans, for instance)
I can't prove that you don't have a high IQ, but that doesn't mean you have one.
Meant that the gasses around which you are kissing are flame bait...
And though your sentiment is in the right place -- corporate leaders bending ethics all over the place and putting bottom line first over everything and likely that is the basis for Mr. Hardt stepping down -- your post did make you sound like an idiot.
It's "ala" not "al la"
The domino analogy signifies companies that are poised and ready to be swayed, not grounded in ethics, thus why does this surprise you so?
It should be "It's" instead of "Its"
Which companies over the last few months have been suing each other for stealing software? I missed that and find that kind of reading interesting
What is it that you do that keeps your shit so clean? Is there a problem with wanting something other than a Geo? Environmentally safer cars don't come cheap, you know.
hrmmmm... found these interesting numbers at USAID: US humanitarian aid is hovering around USD$8,000,000,000 + 9,000,000,000 + 1,500,000,000 + $24,000,000,000 = $42,000,000,000 (yes, 42 Billion) of which 5 Billion is military assistance. This does not include any military budgets as obviously that is top secret or something rediculous like that.
I can't say I understand it myself, but apparently the cost associated with a product purchase versus leasing for three years with depreciation is beneficial to the lesee. In addition, there is a (somewhat) fixed cost of ownership regarding hardware and software since the average desktop hardware gets replaced coincident to the three years. And accountants like to have these types of plans. The crux is that Microsoft software really doesn't have a three year lifespan, especially if you want all your MS programs current, which is provided for in the lease.
Or something like that ;)
1) They get to have a steady stream of income instead of cyclical when products come out
2) Accountants are supposed to like leasing because of corporate write-offs for a product "they need anyway" (whatever)