The excuse for $60 games for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 is the higher resolution they display at.
Launch game prices seem to be generally higher than in the middle of the console's life, though $50 is quite a lot for a single game, I'd think, I don't remember ever paying that much, the most was $40 and I thought that was a lot.
I think the problem is making sure that the quoted text is properly formatted so it looks like a quote, it is easy to tell at a glance where the quote starts and ends.
Why does it matter whether you can "burn" an audio CD? For music, you may as well use a Bic lighter. Portable audio players are so dang small and can hold a hundred albums in a third the volume of a single CD jewel case, such that there is no point in CDs except as a purchase medium.
It is clearly a subscription service and shouldn't be treated as if that is the only choice you get, you can still buy single tracks or buy physical CDs. You trade "buying" 10-15 CDs a year (though you can still buy if you like) for the ability to legally sample any of a few million tracks at any time without having to commit to buying them, and still get to time-shift. To me, that sounds like a decent trade-off.
I don't think a subscription service where you get to subscribe to a huge library for dirt cheap and you get to download what ever you want and keep them forever is a viable business model. I understand basic psychology, people would subscribe for a month for the cost of a single CD and acquire a library of a lifetime and unsubscribe. What you want seems to be the have-your-cake-and-eat-it variety, which frankly, makes you seem a lot like how the RIAA behaves.
I really don't see the problem. For one, it is music, and it doesn't take away from your ability to buy albums outright if you wanted, nor is their any real coersion unless you are dumb enough to not pay the bill.
Sure, the tracks "die" when you stop the subscription, but that's the understanding you were supposed to be getting when you sign up, they weren't telling you you were buying-to-keep an infinite number of tracks for $149 a year. Any assumpion otherwise is that of people that can't or even read at a basic level or don't even read the ad copy.
Anyway, people that don't like it don't have to subscribe, it is simply another option. It's about the same cost as commercial free satellite radio subscription but you control the tracks and when they play. And guess what, you don't pay the radio subscription, it ends too.
I don't see the point in the $99 service unless it is used on an ultra compact computer. I listen to most of my audio away from a computer, only being able to use it at a computer is more of a leash. $149 a year isn't so bad though as it is less than buying 10-15 albums a year but having access to several thousand instead.
As someone mentioned, there is the one at the Vegas Hilton. I think there is a traveling version too, that moves between cities. Paramount has several warehouses of Star Trek artifacts.
It is somewhat unfortunate that this auction probably means scattering from one central private collection to numerous private collections, but I am skeptical about the viability of a major museum or theme park.
I think the terminal and command line are interesting and all, an IDE is going to behave closer to what they understand with other text management software, such as a word processor. Character mode software, especially vi or emacs, is going to seem pretty backwards to anyone that has been exclusively using a GUI for computers. You'd need to make a pretty solid case as to why they are useful for a student to agree with the idea of using them.
The fan of my MBP is always on but usually it is spinning slowly enough that I don't hear it, I just feel it. Even when I am looping three simultaneous HD videos (all but forground video are stuttery but full CPU load), the fan sound isn't bad, my MBP is still the quietest mechanical device in the house, though my Compaq laptop isn't that loud either, silent on idle and only slightly louder at full load.
It appears that Intel has disabled the ability to force down the clock speed in software vs. the PIIIm notebook that I have. The minimum clock is 1GHz, but there is no way to set the computer at that speed and not leave it unless told otherwise, unlike what I've seen with SpeedSwitchXP on my old notebook.
You have that wrong. In order to go more than two-way (two socket) AMD systems, you need to buy Opteron 8xx chips. Those are very expensive, almost as much as Xeon MPs in many cases. The first digit of Opteron numbers note the number of chips that can cooperate at once, 1xx is one socket, 2xx is two socket and 8xx for up to eight.
I don't think the international aspect plays much of a role here. Most of the paid high-bandwidth services that could be hurt have both the service and the customer in the same country.
Personally, I think the Internet, anywhere, benefits more from a network not held hostage by ISPs demanding a double dip or else get an unreliable link on the customer's end.
Very true. Anything 1U is generally going to cost a lot. Even half-width 1U is going to be huge and not portable.
I'm thinking that a second, dirt cheap laptop is probably the way to go if the thickness is a concern, but most affordable laptops are 1.5" thick, but you get a built in screen, keyboard and mouse too.
one could argue that unlicensed sprectrum is actually more valuable to the nation's economy than more cellular bandwidth.
That depends on how you state the argument. There isn't a Linksys, Dlink or Cisco store in either of my nearest large malls, but even the tinyiest mini-mall has at least one cellular provider. Even the stores that sell both Wifi and cell phones, as much or more space is given to the cell phones. And that's to say nothing of the expensive towers that have to be set up every several miles on every highway and to cover all urban and suburban areas. As such, I am thinking there is a lot more money in cellular networking. Even by usage time, I would think there is more human time spent on mobile phones than on 2.4GHz networking and 2.4GHz cordless phones.
You also have to remember the Wii isn't designed a HDTV like the Xbox 360 or the PS3. Games will looks miles better on those systems with a HDTV.
It looks to me that Sony and Microsoft are betting on an HD display revolution. If it doesn't happen in the next generation, and the Nintendo is a lot cheaper for not being HD or most people won't pay for HD, then Nintendo gets a strong advantage.
On a regular TV I would guess the Wii will look better than the 360 or the PS3 just because the ps3/360 will have to dither the graphics.
Dither the graphics? I suppose that would have to be a use of dither that I'm not familar with. If you meant scale, then OK, but with good downscaling of 720p to 480p (or 480i) shouldn't net noticibly inferior image such that an image generated natively would be a significant advantage, expecially on 480i when most NTSC sets aren't that great anyway.
I wonder if the developers that don't "get" Wii (I don't get the name though) are the kind that like to rehash existing concepts and increment the version number.
I have used that menu. Nothing I have tried in that menu allows me to reorder the toolbars to what I think makes sense. Opera is very configurable, but it doesn't allow me to do what I wanted to do. I think both Firefox and IE have more flexibility in reordering and adjusting those toolbars.
Multiply it by 20 MB or so for HD. See how it scales?
Multibly what by 20MB? Neither the unit nor the number used don't make sense.
You might have made sense if you had said that HD video can easily consume 4x to 6x the bandwidth of standard definition. And that bandwidth does cost a lot, even with crappy low bandwidth video from YouTube, they don't have a business model to pay for what they are using. They really don't have the media that justifies HD either.
What the providers really fear is that people will actually start using what they've been told they already have.
They've got giant pipes running into everyone's houses, and business models predicated on the fact that most people don't use them. So they tell everyone 'unlimited bandwidth!' when in fact they cannot provide this.
You know, when I really think of it, I don't really remember any broadband ISP claiming unlimited bandwidth, but "always on" as in no need to wait for a dial-in.
I will say that I don't agree with their clammor to provide a tiered service, the servers are paying for the bits they push, and the clients are generally paying for the link itself, so it doesn't make sense to make the servers pay again for those bits.
I won't use Opera because there is no apparent way to rearrange the control bars. The Address bar is at the top, the tab bar is in the middle and the control bar (back, forward, stop, reload, etc) is at the bottom. I don't understand why someone would think that the control bar makes sense where it is, it breaks the tab indicator from the page that it indicates. I want to set this order, top down: control bar, address bar, tab bar.
Slashdot Mirror
$50, same as now.
The excuse for $60 games for Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3 is the higher resolution they display at.
Launch game prices seem to be generally higher than in the middle of the console's life, though $50 is quite a lot for a single game, I'd think, I don't remember ever paying that much, the most was $40 and I thought that was a lot.
I think the problem is making sure that the quoted text is properly formatted so it looks like a quote, it is easy to tell at a glance where the quote starts and ends.
Why does it matter whether you can "burn" an audio CD? For music, you may as well use a Bic lighter. Portable audio players are so dang small and can hold a hundred albums in a third the volume of a single CD jewel case, such that there is no point in CDs except as a purchase medium.
It is clearly a subscription service and shouldn't be treated as if that is the only choice you get, you can still buy single tracks or buy physical CDs. You trade "buying" 10-15 CDs a year (though you can still buy if you like) for the ability to legally sample any of a few million tracks at any time without having to commit to buying them, and still get to time-shift. To me, that sounds like a decent trade-off.
I don't think a subscription service where you get to subscribe to a huge library for dirt cheap and you get to download what ever you want and keep them forever is a viable business model. I understand basic psychology, people would subscribe for a month for the cost of a single CD and acquire a library of a lifetime and unsubscribe. What you want seems to be the have-your-cake-and-eat-it variety, which frankly, makes you seem a lot like how the RIAA behaves.
I really don't see the problem. For one, it is music, and it doesn't take away from your ability to buy albums outright if you wanted, nor is their any real coersion unless you are dumb enough to not pay the bill.
Sure, the tracks "die" when you stop the subscription, but that's the understanding you were supposed to be getting when you sign up, they weren't telling you you were buying-to-keep an infinite number of tracks for $149 a year. Any assumpion otherwise is that of people that can't or even read at a basic level or don't even read the ad copy.
Anyway, people that don't like it don't have to subscribe, it is simply another option. It's about the same cost as commercial free satellite radio subscription but you control the tracks and when they play. And guess what, you don't pay the radio subscription, it ends too.
I don't see the point in the $99 service unless it is used on an ultra compact computer. I listen to most of my audio away from a computer, only being able to use it at a computer is more of a leash. $149 a year isn't so bad though as it is less than buying 10-15 albums a year but having access to several thousand instead.
As someone mentioned, there is the one at the Vegas Hilton. I think there is a traveling version too, that moves between cities. Paramount has several warehouses of Star Trek artifacts.
It is somewhat unfortunate that this auction probably means scattering from one central private collection to numerous private collections, but I am skeptical about the viability of a major museum or theme park.
I think the terminal and command line are interesting and all, an IDE is going to behave closer to what they understand with other text management software, such as a word processor. Character mode software, especially vi or emacs, is going to seem pretty backwards to anyone that has been exclusively using a GUI for computers. You'd need to make a pretty solid case as to why they are useful for a student to agree with the idea of using them.
Like others, I have a Compaq business notebook that allows the removal of the hard drive by removing one screw.
The fan of my MBP is always on but usually it is spinning slowly enough that I don't hear it, I just feel it. Even when I am looping three simultaneous HD videos (all but forground video are stuttery but full CPU load), the fan sound isn't bad, my MBP is still the quietest mechanical device in the house, though my Compaq laptop isn't that loud either, silent on idle and only slightly louder at full load.
It appears that Intel has disabled the ability to force down the clock speed in software vs. the PIIIm notebook that I have. The minimum clock is 1GHz, but there is no way to set the computer at that speed and not leave it unless told otherwise, unlike what I've seen with SpeedSwitchXP on my old notebook.
So? The FX chips are high end desktop chips, not workstation chips. If you want a workstation chip, use an Opteron system.
I think Woodcrest is supposed to go into the workstation / server market, so it might very well be a Xeon DP, though maybe not Xeon MP.
You have that wrong. In order to go more than two-way (two socket) AMD systems, you need to buy Opteron 8xx chips. Those are very expensive, almost as much as Xeon MPs in many cases. The first digit of Opteron numbers note the number of chips that can cooperate at once, 1xx is one socket, 2xx is two socket and 8xx for up to eight.
I don't think the international aspect plays much of a role here. Most of the paid high-bandwidth services that could be hurt have both the service and the customer in the same country.
Personally, I think the Internet, anywhere, benefits more from a network not held hostage by ISPs demanding a double dip or else get an unreliable link on the customer's end.
Very true. Anything 1U is generally going to cost a lot. Even half-width 1U is going to be huge and not portable.
I'm thinking that a second, dirt cheap laptop is probably the way to go if the thickness is a concern, but most affordable laptops are 1.5" thick, but you get a built in screen, keyboard and mouse too.
Take a look at the Thinkpad t60p series...Make sure you run Linux or Win64, or you might as well config it with 3G of RAM however.
t60p appears to be a Core Duo, it is not 64 bit.
For a short while, I did have a computer with 4GB in a Windows computer before, it did have access to about 3640MB of the memory.
one could argue that unlicensed sprectrum is actually more valuable to the nation's economy than more cellular bandwidth.
That depends on how you state the argument. There isn't a Linksys, Dlink or Cisco store in either of my nearest large malls, but even the tinyiest mini-mall has at least one cellular provider. Even the stores that sell both Wifi and cell phones, as much or more space is given to the cell phones. And that's to say nothing of the expensive towers that have to be set up every several miles on every highway and to cover all urban and suburban areas. As such, I am thinking there is a lot more money in cellular networking. Even by usage time, I would think there is more human time spent on mobile phones than on 2.4GHz networking and 2.4GHz cordless phones.
We need to get away from 2.4ghz - way to crowded.
I'm sure the "a" wireless bands are wide-open just about everywhere.
You also have to remember the Wii isn't designed a HDTV like the Xbox 360 or the PS3. Games will looks miles better on those systems with a HDTV.
It looks to me that Sony and Microsoft are betting on an HD display revolution. If it doesn't happen in the next generation, and the Nintendo is a lot cheaper for not being HD or most people won't pay for HD, then Nintendo gets a strong advantage.
On a regular TV I would guess the Wii will look better than the 360 or the PS3 just because the ps3/360 will have to dither the graphics.
Dither the graphics? I suppose that would have to be a use of dither that I'm not familar with. If you meant scale, then OK, but with good downscaling of 720p to 480p (or 480i) shouldn't net noticibly inferior image such that an image generated natively would be a significant advantage, expecially on 480i when most NTSC sets aren't that great anyway.
I wonder if the developers that don't "get" Wii (I don't get the name though) are the kind that like to rehash existing concepts and increment the version number.
Turn off the address bar and convert your page bar into your new address bar, like this..
Thank you. It was pretty tedious and haphazardly counterintuitive to get this to work.
I have used that menu. Nothing I have tried in that menu allows me to reorder the toolbars to what I think makes sense. Opera is very configurable, but it doesn't allow me to do what I wanted to do. I think both Firefox and IE have more flexibility in reordering and adjusting those toolbars.
Then rearrange it that way, you can.
Sorry, but if it was possible to do this, I simply couldn't find it anywhere I looked. If an app is customizable, it shouldn't be so hard to do it.
Multiply it by 20 MB or so for HD. See how it scales?
Multibly what by 20MB? Neither the unit nor the number used don't make sense.
You might have made sense if you had said that HD video can easily consume 4x to 6x the bandwidth of standard definition. And that bandwidth does cost a lot, even with crappy low bandwidth video from YouTube, they don't have a business model to pay for what they are using. They really don't have the media that justifies HD either.
What the providers really fear is that people will actually start using what they've been told they already have.
They've got giant pipes running into everyone's houses, and business models predicated on the fact that most people don't use them. So they tell everyone 'unlimited bandwidth!' when in fact they cannot provide this.
You know, when I really think of it, I don't really remember any broadband ISP claiming unlimited bandwidth, but "always on" as in no need to wait for a dial-in.
I will say that I don't agree with their clammor to provide a tiered service, the servers are paying for the bits they push, and the clients are generally paying for the link itself, so it doesn't make sense to make the servers pay again for those bits.
I won't use Opera because there is no apparent way to rearrange the control bars. The Address bar is at the top, the tab bar is in the middle and the control bar (back, forward, stop, reload, etc) is at the bottom. I don't understand why someone would think that the control bar makes sense where it is, it breaks the tab indicator from the page that it indicates. I want to set this order, top down: control bar, address bar, tab bar.