Yea, Uverse sucks. Not to mention I wouldn't want to run my 360 for that long anyways. It sits in the open air with plenty of ventilation and still has heat issues. Pity that the PS3 doesn't support this because I'm much more comfortable letting that run for hours at a time and it has a bigger internal hdd for DVR
Screw it man. When I'm dogfighting through traffic on the 405 I need access to radar on my HUD to watch out for bogeys trying to get in my blind spot. I AM driving with this kind of setup
I'll stick with Opera Mobile. It's clearly head and shoulders above the competition, and the only place where it isn't(Flash support) there are other browsers(like Skyfire) to pick up that little bit of slack.
While I'm not so as gungho about it, I do believe that the economy needs a reset. The Great Depression setup the growth of the next 3 decades while the late 70s/Stagflation era setup the growth of the 80s and 90s.
You need a crash to bring the boom. That's how cycles work. Just like the pine cones that only release seeds during forest fires while their parents burn up.
Well, if you were talking 2007, you might be on to something, but as of the middle of this year you're only talking a ~3million difference in announced sales numbers across the life of the consoles.
And yes, it would be nice if it didn't require a disk and I imagine eventually it won't, but maybe not because it would compete with the PSN video store
Re:Based on what we've seen so far
on
Apple vs. Google TVs
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Really? You have the 360 over the PS3 in this regard? PS3 works with standard media servers, has a great freeware media server that transcodes on the fly, doesn't double dip your wallet for netflix like the 360 does, and has a much smoother multimedia interface
Price compared to inflation doesn't really matter. Most games do not have ongoing development costs. They just need sales to cover total costs and generate profit. Waverace was 80 bucks, but they had a much smaller market. More units means less price per unit in order to cover costs.
Well, it was ~10k to install in 1982 money, but the govt kicked in half upfront. That's a lot of scratch out of pocket when the average power bill was under 50$
Again, they're not the same. Wider screen doesn't mean less pixels if you pick up the equivalent resolution. The problem is that you see a similar horizontal number and you think it is equivalent. It's actually the widescreen model of the step down resolution. Like I said, just takes a little effort to pay attention to what you're buying. WUXGA is the widescreen of UXGA, and WUXGA has more pixels.
I've had solar hot water at my family's home since the early 80s. Looks kind of weird, like giant lasagna pans on the roof, but I'll be damned if they don't work great and keep the gas bill down. Not sure how much it will help in Washington, but worth it in So Cal, especially with the govt kicking in a large tax credit
You're not losing pixels, you're just throwing numbers out there without actually knowing what you're talking about.
1600x1200 is UXGA. 1650x1080 is WSXGA+, which is the widescreen variant of SXGA+ (1400x1050). If you want widescreen based on the 1600x1200 resolution, buy a WUXGA monitor(1920x1200). Pretty simple, really. You only "lose" pixels if you don't research the monitor you are purchasing.
And services can be set to interact with the desktop, or set to run under user contexts(particularly common when dealing with com+ authentication).
2008 Server Core does not have UAC. Users can log in, but all they have access to are applets and CLI, which is all servers are really for anyways. Again, not sure why a server OS needs it in the first place, especially if the Server Core edition doesn't.
And, apparently, it's detecting certain things in the DB(I imagine some particular triggers) that causes it to request elevation when there is no user even logged in(since the DB is accessed through Windows via the Everyone user). And it doesn't seem to inherit those rights to items launched by whatever you grant access to, or at least sporadically it doesn't. It's removal of rights because the user is granted those rights already, and it prompts you to use those rights when you may not be present(like applications running under user context). It would be much more useful if there was a whitelist, but there isn't. Servers have limited access, UAC in it's present form has no use for it. It's there to prevent spyware, not to prevent the administrator from doing his job.
Except that it interferes with background services and installations even when you allow it to run. The routinely corrupts our Sybase databases because the access control interrupts writes for authorized users when it feels like it. There is no place for it on a server OS. UAC is not the same as preventing root access, UAC is like running a script blocker. When it detects something it doesn't like it will fire. When you try to do something that needs root access and you do not have that capability, you just don't have that capability.
UAC is great for workstations, it's shit for servers. There is no reason UAC should be on a server at all. Servers are not for user access, they are for running server applications.
Actually, FFO, original EQ(pre-WoWing of the experience system), and some other games are more like Foxconn than WoW. WoW is like working at Hot Dog on a Stick
Making it modular has nothing to do with completely wrecking the configuration design that has been in place for many IIS iterations and many years. You can still have a unified UI and have it break down in to modular parts behind the scenes. 2008 took what was a strongpoint for IIS(essentially as an easy to configure webserver for small or medium enterprise) and changed it in to something that requires more knowledge and complexity than should be required. It's a nightmare for me since I support a great deal of network/server administrators that don't know their ass from a hole in the wall. You don't need to break the UI to change the game, but MS went ahead and did that anyways. And then added UAC on for good measure just to rub it in.
I agree with the basic sentiment of this. They changed too many things that frankly worked great and didn't need improvement. They did this for Server 2008 as well. The new IIS is ridiculously poor in design and instead of having two or three different areas of configuration(be it the website, the virtual folder, etc), you have 3 dozen different applets with 3 or 4 configuration settings each. Why mess with something that works perfectly already? Hell, why put fucking UAC on a server OS?
I am a PS3 owner, not an Xbox360 owner. Home was very hyped, and it fell short of that hype off the bat. The servers were indeed packed upon release, and there are plenty of people in it now, but it is not what it could be and the reviews given by industry professionals support that. The original talk of having a fully customized home space with places to put your trophies and such have never been realized, and that is what hurts it for me. While they constantly improve it, it has yet to live up to its potential, thus I consider it a bit of a flop, especially when it was so barebones at the beginning after a ton of hype.
Slashdot Mirror
Yea, Uverse sucks. Not to mention I wouldn't want to run my 360 for that long anyways. It sits in the open air with plenty of ventilation and still has heat issues. Pity that the PS3 doesn't support this because I'm much more comfortable letting that run for hours at a time and it has a bigger internal hdd for DVR
Screw it man. When I'm dogfighting through traffic on the 405 I need access to radar on my HUD to watch out for bogeys trying to get in my blind spot. I AM driving with this kind of setup
I'll stick with Opera Mobile. It's clearly head and shoulders above the competition, and the only place where it isn't(Flash support) there are other browsers(like Skyfire) to pick up that little bit of slack.
You cheat, too. Which is what this ISP is doing. Oh wait, that's not what you meant?
Like this one? http://www.dell.com/us/p/alienware-m17x/pd?refid=laptop-alienware-m17x&~ck=mn
While I'm not so as gungho about it, I do believe that the economy needs a reset. The Great Depression setup the growth of the next 3 decades while the late 70s/Stagflation era setup the growth of the 80s and 90s.
You need a crash to bring the boom. That's how cycles work. Just like the pine cones that only release seeds during forest fires while their parents burn up.
Well, if you were talking 2007, you might be on to something, but as of the middle of this year you're only talking a ~3million difference in announced sales numbers across the life of the consoles. And yes, it would be nice if it didn't require a disk and I imagine eventually it won't, but maybe not because it would compete with the PSN video store
Really? You have the 360 over the PS3 in this regard? PS3 works with standard media servers, has a great freeware media server that transcodes on the fly, doesn't double dip your wallet for netflix like the 360 does, and has a much smoother multimedia interface
Price compared to inflation doesn't really matter. Most games do not have ongoing development costs. They just need sales to cover total costs and generate profit. Waverace was 80 bucks, but they had a much smaller market. More units means less price per unit in order to cover costs.
Well, it was ~10k to install in 1982 money, but the govt kicked in half upfront. That's a lot of scratch out of pocket when the average power bill was under 50$
Again, they're not the same. Wider screen doesn't mean less pixels if you pick up the equivalent resolution. The problem is that you see a similar horizontal number and you think it is equivalent. It's actually the widescreen model of the step down resolution. Like I said, just takes a little effort to pay attention to what you're buying. WUXGA is the widescreen of UXGA, and WUXGA has more pixels.
I've had solar hot water at my family's home since the early 80s. Looks kind of weird, like giant lasagna pans on the roof, but I'll be damned if they don't work great and keep the gas bill down. Not sure how much it will help in Washington, but worth it in So Cal, especially with the govt kicking in a large tax credit
You're not losing pixels, you're just throwing numbers out there without actually knowing what you're talking about. 1600x1200 is UXGA. 1650x1080 is WSXGA+, which is the widescreen variant of SXGA+ (1400x1050). If you want widescreen based on the 1600x1200 resolution, buy a WUXGA monitor(1920x1200). Pretty simple, really. You only "lose" pixels if you don't research the monitor you are purchasing.
You never played Sim City 2000 did you?
Can I patent wiping my ass so I can sue everyone too?
My only question is who the hell named it "stuxnet"?
And services can be set to interact with the desktop, or set to run under user contexts(particularly common when dealing with com+ authentication). 2008 Server Core does not have UAC. Users can log in, but all they have access to are applets and CLI, which is all servers are really for anyways. Again, not sure why a server OS needs it in the first place, especially if the Server Core edition doesn't.
Or you could check out Windows 2008 Server Core. There are some limits and limited GUI, but it's essentially CLI
And, apparently, it's detecting certain things in the DB(I imagine some particular triggers) that causes it to request elevation when there is no user even logged in(since the DB is accessed through Windows via the Everyone user). And it doesn't seem to inherit those rights to items launched by whatever you grant access to, or at least sporadically it doesn't. It's removal of rights because the user is granted those rights already, and it prompts you to use those rights when you may not be present(like applications running under user context). It would be much more useful if there was a whitelist, but there isn't. Servers have limited access, UAC in it's present form has no use for it. It's there to prevent spyware, not to prevent the administrator from doing his job.
Except that it interferes with background services and installations even when you allow it to run. The routinely corrupts our Sybase databases because the access control interrupts writes for authorized users when it feels like it. There is no place for it on a server OS. UAC is not the same as preventing root access, UAC is like running a script blocker. When it detects something it doesn't like it will fire. When you try to do something that needs root access and you do not have that capability, you just don't have that capability.
UAC is great for workstations, it's shit for servers. There is no reason UAC should be on a server at all. Servers are not for user access, they are for running server applications.
Actually, FFO, original EQ(pre-WoWing of the experience system), and some other games are more like Foxconn than WoW. WoW is like working at Hot Dog on a Stick
Making it modular has nothing to do with completely wrecking the configuration design that has been in place for many IIS iterations and many years. You can still have a unified UI and have it break down in to modular parts behind the scenes. 2008 took what was a strongpoint for IIS(essentially as an easy to configure webserver for small or medium enterprise) and changed it in to something that requires more knowledge and complexity than should be required. It's a nightmare for me since I support a great deal of network/server administrators that don't know their ass from a hole in the wall. You don't need to break the UI to change the game, but MS went ahead and did that anyways. And then added UAC on for good measure just to rub it in.
I agree with the basic sentiment of this. They changed too many things that frankly worked great and didn't need improvement. They did this for Server 2008 as well. The new IIS is ridiculously poor in design and instead of having two or three different areas of configuration(be it the website, the virtual folder, etc), you have 3 dozen different applets with 3 or 4 configuration settings each. Why mess with something that works perfectly already? Hell, why put fucking UAC on a server OS?
I am a PS3 owner, not an Xbox360 owner. Home was very hyped, and it fell short of that hype off the bat. The servers were indeed packed upon release, and there are plenty of people in it now, but it is not what it could be and the reviews given by industry professionals support that. The original talk of having a fully customized home space with places to put your trophies and such have never been realized, and that is what hurts it for me. While they constantly improve it, it has yet to live up to its potential, thus I consider it a bit of a flop, especially when it was so barebones at the beginning after a ton of hype.