Anyone who desires to make disparaging comments about Microsoft would presumably be motivated to do so because of their dislike for:
a) Microsoft's Products
b) Microsofts's business practices
If a) then why would they ever want to use FrontPage for such a purpose? There are many other HTML editors out there to choose from that would be perfectly acceptable for designing a Microsoft-bashing website.
If b) then the issue would never come up because it would be against the principles of such a person to ever purchase a product from "those heartless monopolizing bastards."
I use Outlook at work too. When I bought my Palm IIIx, it came with software to allow it to sync with Outlook. The software works great--I have no complaints so far. So what's you point? My Palm integrates just fine with my MS desktop softare.
Re:...but will it keep up with the upgrades?
on
Laser-equipped 747
·
· Score: 1
No problem. Just build it with flashable ROMs, then the Air Force can download updates from the manufacturer when it becomes necessary.
You need to read more carefully... The person quoted in the article (who you also quoted) was refering to the software-based emulator that AMD developers had to resort to before AMD signed this deal with Transmeta. They're betting that they can get better performance out of a Transmeta processor running "code-morphed" Sledgehammer instructions than their current software-only emulator. So basically, what AMD gets out of this deal is a more usable emulator to make their developers' jobs easier, and in exchange, Transmeta gets technology that will improve their future products. All in all, it looks like a pretty sweet deal for Transmeta.
The problem with that argument is that you're comparing apples and oranges here. If Tom's Hardware had done a review like this on the Transmeta chip, then maybe you'd have a point. You may be able to make a point that ZDNet or whoever is biased against Transmeta, but when you stretch this conclusion to cover all reviewers and yell "CONSPIRACY!! FAVORITISM!!", it looks a bit ridiculous to say the least. Personally, I'm looking forward to reading a review by Tom on the Transmeta chip. I'm sure he'll give it a fair shake, just like he's done for Intel, AMD and Cyrix in the past.
Nice unit, but if I'm going to shell out $450, why doesn't it have Flash ROM?!? The website says they chose not to go that route to cut costs, which would be totally understandable for a budget PDA, but $450 doesn't really fit into the "budget" category in my book. Even if a Flash ROM ended up costing me an extra $10, it would make more sense on a high-end unit, as it protects my already significant investment by giving me more expansion and upgrade options. (ucLinux, etc...)
Sez who? Do you have access to one that you've tested? I was reading an article over on Tom's Hardware about the Microprocessor Forum (http://www.tomshardware.com/business/00q4/001011/ mpf2-02.html) and the impression I got was that it wasn't too shabby. The whole point of a laptop is to be portable, after all, and if it lasts 6-8 hours on a battery charge--as good as some "Pocket PCs" out there, for that matter--but isn't exactly a Formula-1 speedster, who cares? At any rate, if it has enough umph to play DVD movies, it ought to be more than sufficient for your average word-processing, 'net browsing or email. Sheesh, whaddaya want--a friggin' portable CRAY?
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone who desires to make disparaging comments about Microsoft would presumably be motivated to do so because of their dislike for:
- b) Microsofts's business practices
If a) then why would they ever want to use FrontPage for such a purpose? There are many other HTML editors out there to choose from that would be perfectly acceptable for designing a Microsoft-bashing website.If b) then the issue would never come up because it would be against the principles of such a person to ever purchase a product from "those heartless monopolizing bastards."
I use Outlook at work too. When I bought my Palm IIIx, it came with software to allow it to sync with Outlook. The software works great--I have no complaints so far. So what's you point? My Palm integrates just fine with my MS desktop softare.
No problem. Just build it with flashable ROMs, then the Air Force can download updates from the manufacturer when it becomes necessary.
You need to read more carefully... The person quoted in the article (who you also quoted) was refering to the software-based emulator that AMD developers had to resort to before AMD signed this deal with Transmeta. They're betting that they can get better performance out of a Transmeta processor running "code-morphed" Sledgehammer instructions than their current software-only emulator. So basically, what AMD gets out of this deal is a more usable emulator to make their developers' jobs easier, and in exchange, Transmeta gets technology that will improve their future products. All in all, it looks like a pretty sweet deal for Transmeta.
The problem with that argument is that you're comparing apples and oranges here. If Tom's Hardware had done a review like this on the Transmeta chip, then maybe you'd have a point. You may be able to make a point that ZDNet or whoever is biased against Transmeta, but when you stretch this conclusion to cover all reviewers and yell "CONSPIRACY!! FAVORITISM!!", it looks a bit ridiculous to say the least. Personally, I'm looking forward to reading a review by Tom on the Transmeta chip. I'm sure he'll give it a fair shake, just like he's done for Intel, AMD and Cyrix in the past.
Nice unit, but if I'm going to shell out $450, why doesn't it have Flash ROM?!? The website says they chose not to go that route to cut costs, which would be totally understandable for a budget PDA, but $450 doesn't really fit into the "budget" category in my book. Even if a Flash ROM ended up costing me an extra $10, it would make more sense on a high-end unit, as it protects my already significant investment by giving me more expansion and upgrade options. (ucLinux, etc...)
Sez who? Do you have access to one that you've tested? I was reading an article over on Tom's Hardware about the Microprocessor Forum (http://www.tomshardware.com/business/00q4/001011/ mpf2-02.html) and the impression I got was that it wasn't too shabby. The whole point of a laptop is to be portable, after all, and if it lasts 6-8 hours on a battery charge--as good as some "Pocket PCs" out there, for that matter--but isn't exactly a Formula-1 speedster, who cares? At any rate, if it has enough umph to play DVD movies, it ought to be more than sufficient for your average word-processing, 'net browsing or email. Sheesh, whaddaya want--a friggin' portable CRAY?