How can anyone in this day and age not be biased one direction or another? Unless you braved the frozen tundra of the Siberian wastelands and stumbled onto civilization, you are biased. Anyone that has really used a computer in the United States has been biased one way or another whether by a certain degree of comfort with 'this is what I have always used' or 'well, this is what came on my machine, so I keep it for tech support.' Any school-age child in a reasonably well-funded district has been touched in some way by computers and the operating system that was on them. This makes them inherently biased. The work force is over-populated with machines, and managers who insist on having the same OS loaded on them that they use at home because there is no learning curve. That makes most working adults biased also. You can ask for a non-prejudicial judge to preside on the bench, but it's a delusion. To make matters worse.. would you actually want someone who knew nothing about computers to make such a landmark decision? This is a double-edged sword. Comfort and exposure breed bias and prejudice.
I'll just keep chugging away on my linux box, and watch from the sidelines.
Re:Intel inside? Doesn't make sense.
on
Salon on the XBox
·
· Score: 1
True enough! If they would even consider using multiple Itaniums, then perhaps one could see a significant performance improvement over the standard console. Unfortunately, this would entail a prohibitive cost value for a simple game machine. It was truly disappointing enough to see the cut of Alpha support with Windows2000, but I feel that it was a preemptive strike to further Intel's needs. This seems to be another instance of this bizarre marriage.
Interestingly enough, on page 2 of the article, the author touts the reasons for needing a $3000 (his quote, not mine) high-end machine for games to have good playability, and cites the X-Box as being a wonderful solution. The question that is begged for here is: "Is that PC usable for more than games, and is it actually -upgradeable-?". The answer is obvious. The true irony of the article is that the praise for the box comes just a few paragraphs down from the author's venting frustration over game crashes under the Windows environment. Can anyone take this seriously?
It's plainly obvious that any moron can write an article praising the ridiculous. Perhaps Salon is hiring? I'd like a job where I don't have to think...
Slashdot Mirror
Can anyone mirror this thing, or at least copy/paste it here?
How can anyone in this day and age not be biased one direction or another? Unless you braved the frozen tundra of the Siberian wastelands and stumbled onto civilization, you are biased. Anyone that has really used a computer in the United States has been biased one way or another whether by a certain degree of comfort with 'this is what I have always used' or 'well, this is what came on my machine, so I keep it for tech support.' Any school-age child in a reasonably well-funded district has been touched in some way by computers and the operating system that was on them. This makes them inherently biased. The work force is over-populated with machines, and managers who insist on having the same OS loaded on them that they use at home because there is no learning curve. That makes most working adults biased also. You can ask for a non-prejudicial judge to preside on the bench, but it's a delusion. To make matters worse.. would you actually want someone who knew nothing about computers to make such a landmark decision? This is a double-edged sword. Comfort and exposure breed bias and prejudice.
I'll just keep chugging away on my linux box, and watch from the sidelines.
True enough! If they would even consider using multiple Itaniums, then perhaps one could see a significant performance improvement over the standard console. Unfortunately, this would entail a prohibitive cost value for a simple game machine. It was truly disappointing enough to see the cut of Alpha support with Windows2000, but I feel that it was a preemptive strike to further Intel's needs. This seems to be another instance of this bizarre marriage. Interestingly enough, on page 2 of the article, the author touts the reasons for needing a $3000 (his quote, not mine) high-end machine for games to have good playability, and cites the X-Box as being a wonderful solution. The question that is begged for here is: "Is that PC usable for more than games, and is it actually -upgradeable-?". The answer is obvious. The true irony of the article is that the praise for the box comes just a few paragraphs down from the author's venting frustration over game crashes under the Windows environment. Can anyone take this seriously? It's plainly obvious that any moron can write an article praising the ridiculous. Perhaps Salon is hiring? I'd like a job where I don't have to think...