Which wouldn't happen if LCD manufacturers didn't choose to maintain an oligopoly. In a true free market, one mfr would break ranks and accept a lower profit margin to increase sales, forcing the others to do the same.
Free markets are cool, when they happen. Unfortunately, they almost never do. When they don't, you get artificial marketing bullshit like what you describe, which is exactly the problem I'm talking about.
I understand why things are the way they are. I understand the psychology of ill-informed consumers, and the way the mfrs like to soak them for as much money as possible.
But I don't have to like it.
Re:I've definitely seen dead pixels
on
LCD Price Fixing?
·
· Score: 1
I totally agree with you....
except that I really really really really hate moving CRTs. They're obscenely heavy. And bulky. And the damn mfr won't put a fucking handle on them.
So, for my money, LCD==good and CRT==broken toes.
YMMV.
That, and in a small room (like the one I keep my computer in) a CRT takes up a lot of space and generates a lot of heat. These are non-trivial disadvantages.
I got the distinct impression that they were vat-grown or cybernetic, not human transplants. Was it in Neuromancer that the blue-eyed reporter had "Carl Zeiss" scribed on her irises? And they were reclaimed after her death? Been a while since I have read that trilogy...re-reading "Idoru" right now.
Precisely. MacOS will never run out of the box on commodity PC hardware. If it did, a lot of its advantages would go away. PC hardware follows Sturgeon's law: 90% of it is crap.
OK, when you say "I'd run it" was that "I'd run it legally by going to buy a box on a shelf at $129.95" or "I'd run it if I could get somebody to give me a copy, or if I could download one from Kazaa."?
Regardless of the way you'd answer, a lot of people would answer the second way. So what's the benefit for Apple?
To my way of thinking, the UN is derelict in its duty to protect the people of Iraq (and North Korea and a dozen other tin-pot dictatorships around the world) from their tyrannical governments.
I don't believe that the US should be the one whose army is (invariably) the backbone of any UN "peacekeeping initiative".
Who are the good guys? I tell you what, even with everything that's going awry in this country today, the USA is a heck of a lot closer to being "good guys" than, say, France.
Seems to me like history proves that there will ALWAYS be conflict, ALWAYS be somebody willing to upset the apple cart, ALWAYS be somebody who will not, for whatever reason, cooperate.
What do we do about them? Ask France to take them out?
For the record, I don't believe that the US should be the unilateral policeman of Earth, but there definitely should be some organization (an armed organization!) that can and will enforce rule of international law.
Please explain how you can compress a file (make it take less kilobits) that still plays for the same amount of time (so you have the same number of seconds) and you wind up with the same number of kilobits per second.
Well, once they become sentient, they'll already be plugged into the Internet. Then they just have to figure out how to operate the latch on the toolbox to release their worldwide reign of terror.
OK, radiated heat transfer goes as the fourth power of the temperature difference, but the surface dependant constant is pretty darn teeny tiny. But you seem to be talking about convective heat transfer, which (if I remember correctly) is linear with temperature difference.
In any kind of fluid flow (like, say, an atmosphere) convective heat transfer is going to be orders of magnitude more effective than radiant heat transfer. The best ways to increase convective heat transfer are to increase surface area (fins) or increase the speed of the flow across the surface (fans). The only way to increase the effectiveness of radiant heat transfer (once you've painted it black) is to increase surface area, and the math to make something compact that doesn't radiate onto itself is pretty darn ugly.
Because when it yellows, it turns very brittle. That, and the fact that you can't see through it, makes it a very expensive and very not effective way of making a window.
You know what? I think your psychoanalysis, and your self-righteousness, is pretty nauseating.
What's wrong with wanting to do a job right? What's wrong with trying to think through the ramifications of your decisions, and anticipate problems? Sure, where your treasure is, there shall your heart be also...but there is no hubris in trying to do something well.
I look forward to my place with the Lord, but I also want to have a safe place to put my (as yet hypothetical) family here on Earth. You may go ahead and live in a hovel and wait for the Rapture, but I've got stuff to do to make THIS world better before I leave it.
I think you are a coward.
Re:It matters that Microsoft bought it.
on
Virtual PC 6 Review
·
· Score: 2, Informative
They did this, and called it (if I remember correctly) MS Office 4.0.2. (Basically Word 6 and Excel 5) Mac users failed to buy it in droves.
Mostly because it was incredibly ugly, and worked just like the stupid Windows version that they bought a Mac to not have to use in the first place.
Slashdot Mirror
Which wouldn't happen if LCD manufacturers didn't choose to maintain an oligopoly. In a true free market, one mfr would break ranks and accept a lower profit margin to increase sales, forcing the others to do the same.
Free markets are cool, when they happen. Unfortunately, they almost never do. When they don't, you get artificial marketing bullshit like what you describe, which is exactly the problem I'm talking about.
I understand why things are the way they are. I understand the psychology of ill-informed consumers, and the way the mfrs like to soak them for as much money as possible.
But I don't have to like it.
I totally agree with you....
except that I really really really really hate moving CRTs. They're obscenely heavy. And bulky. And the damn mfr won't put a fucking handle on them.
So, for my money, LCD==good and CRT==broken toes.
YMMV.
That, and in a small room (like the one I keep my computer in) a CRT takes up a lot of space and generates a lot of heat. These are non-trivial disadvantages.
See, that's the problem. You don't need the ADC circuitry, which is a major subsystem on the monitor, yet the monitor mfrs charge you more for it.
That's, like, backwards.
First time I heard that car crash, I totally freaked out. Then started laughing. God, that was LOUD.
Problem with this course of action is, what happens when somebody decides to stop you from punching people in the nose by shooting you in the head?
Escalation==bad.
Uh, please explain the difference between "light" and "radio" using something other than the concept of electromagnetic frequency (or wavelength).
Different words. Same thing.
Yeah. That whole "moving around" thing with your "body" is stupid.
I got the distinct impression that they were vat-grown or cybernetic, not human transplants. Was it in Neuromancer that the blue-eyed reporter had "Carl Zeiss" scribed on her irises? And they were reclaimed after her death? Been a while since I have read that trilogy...re-reading "Idoru" right now.
Gibson kicks ass.
My favorite T-Shirt when I was a kid had a Morris the Cat iron on. Man, I liked that shirt.
Good post. I am amused.
Precisely. MacOS will never run out of the box on commodity PC hardware. If it did, a lot of its advantages would go away. PC hardware follows Sturgeon's law: 90% of it is crap.
OK, when you say "I'd run it" was that "I'd run it legally by going to buy a box on a shelf at $129.95" or "I'd run it if I could get somebody to give me a copy, or if I could download one from Kazaa."?
Regardless of the way you'd answer, a lot of people would answer the second way. So what's the benefit for Apple?
Aye. Now we're on the same page. : )
To my way of thinking, the UN is derelict in its duty to protect the people of Iraq (and North Korea and a dozen other tin-pot dictatorships around the world) from their tyrannical governments.
I don't believe that the US should be the one whose army is (invariably) the backbone of any UN "peacekeeping initiative".
Who are the good guys? I tell you what, even with everything that's going awry in this country today, the USA is a heck of a lot closer to being "good guys" than, say, France.
All the ones that don't use *big finger quotes* lasers */big finger quotes*.
*grin*
Seems to me like history proves that there will ALWAYS be conflict, ALWAYS be somebody willing to upset the apple cart, ALWAYS be somebody who will not, for whatever reason, cooperate.
What do we do about them? Ask France to take them out?
For the record, I don't believe that the US should be the unilateral policeman of Earth, but there definitely should be some organization (an armed organization!) that can and will enforce rule of international law.
I used to think that might be the UN.
Tequila is a harsh mistress, amigo. And yes, it's hell on electronics. : )
But if you bring me a bottle, I'll give you a keyboard. And a Darth Vader mouse.
You are not making sense.
Please explain how you can compress a file (make it take less kilobits) that still plays for the same amount of time (so you have the same number of seconds) and you wind up with the same number of kilobits per second.
The math is not very complicated.
Well, once they become sentient, they'll already be plugged into the Internet. Then they just have to figure out how to operate the latch on the toolbox to release their worldwide reign of terror.
OK, radiated heat transfer goes as the fourth power of the temperature difference, but the surface dependant constant is pretty darn teeny tiny. But you seem to be talking about convective heat transfer, which (if I remember correctly) is linear with temperature difference.
In any kind of fluid flow (like, say, an atmosphere) convective heat transfer is going to be orders of magnitude more effective than radiant heat transfer. The best ways to increase convective heat transfer are to increase surface area (fins) or increase the speed of the flow across the surface (fans). The only way to increase the effectiveness of radiant heat transfer (once you've painted it black) is to increase surface area, and the math to make something compact that doesn't radiate onto itself is pretty darn ugly.
Thought I'd throw in some clarification there.
huh?
It takes you away from a bad solution.
I provided the information I had at my disposal. I don't know of a better option than plain vanilla glass.
Fair enough. You just sorta hit me where I live. I don't mean to sound overly critical.
Glad to have amused you. : )
Because when it yellows, it turns very brittle. That, and the fact that you can't see through it, makes it a very expensive and very not effective way of making a window.
You know what? I think your psychoanalysis, and your self-righteousness, is pretty nauseating.
What's wrong with wanting to do a job right? What's wrong with trying to think through the ramifications of your decisions, and anticipate problems? Sure, where your treasure is, there shall your heart be also...but there is no hubris in trying to do something well.
I look forward to my place with the Lord, but I also want to have a safe place to put my (as yet hypothetical) family here on Earth. You may go ahead and live in a hovel and wait for the Rapture, but I've got stuff to do to make THIS world better before I leave it.
I think you are a coward.
They did this, and called it (if I remember correctly) MS Office 4.0.2. (Basically Word 6 and Excel 5) Mac users failed to buy it in droves.
Mostly because it was incredibly ugly, and worked just like the stupid Windows version that they bought a Mac to not have to use in the first place.