Thanks Steve, but the Associated Press has been standardized on pheed for well over a year now.
Have they been using iPhoto, too? Gee, maybe there's room in the world for more than one way to put photos in RSS feeds. Flickr has been publishing RSS and Atom feeds of photos since 2004, and they don't use Pheed.
I like how Apple reinvents pheed and calls it "Photocasting" as well as "incredibly new".
Pheed is just a specification (for what, 2 elements?), and a not terribly exciting app. That iPhoto now implements something one could do with Pheed doesn't make the feature of publishing and subscribing to RSS feeds within the app any less "new". For all you know, iPhoto uses Pheed, The fact that it wouldn't make a difference one way or the other if it did says something about how important Pheed is.
From the commentary on the various live feeds, it sound more like Apple re-invented Flickr.
More or less, yeah, but they've taken the 80% task of photo sharing and made it even easier and more direct than Flickr or email, within some constraints. If you've got.Mac, and the person you want to share with uses iPhoto, you can basically feed images straight from your iPhoto to theirs. No email, no web pages, no nothin'.
I think that's pretty cool, even if it's not utterly groundbreaking. I would expect more photo apps to add this exact feature (both publishing and subscribing) in the near future. Up until now the publishing has all been by uploading your pictures to Flickr (or elsewhere), and the subscribing has all been in newsreaders designed around text.
Re:video DRM is more tolerable than music DRM
on
A Look at Google DRM
·
· Score: 1
That's why I've never used the iTunes store and never will. I don't have to worry that five years from now I'll have a hard drive crash, or ten years from now I'll lose a password, and all my music purchases will be gone forever. I'm only going to buy music if it's mine for life, and if I can quickly and easily backup my music library whenever I wish.
Um...you can easily back up your music library whenever you wish. iTunes DRM doesn't prevent you from copying the files at all. You can put them on another disk, another computer, a CD/DVD, upload them to an FTP server and let the world mirror them, etc.
Technologically speaking, the iPod is not that great.
And realisticly speaking, technology is never the only factor in the success of a product. I can't fathom why so many people seem to not get that.
To bring this back on-topic, the e-ink tech in Sony's reader is pretty badass, but the product itself, with the usual Sony DRM and poor software, will probably suck. Instead of exploiting the advantages an e-book has over physical books, they're bogging it down with a lot of disadvantages.
Unless I'm simply ignorant of Lanier's accomplishments, why should we listen to anything he has to say?
Maybe I'm just strange, but I tend to care more about people's ideas than their accomplishments. Of course you should exercise some skepticism about whether they are really qualified to make some statements, and so on, but whether they worked at company X or company Y or have how many degrees (the usual bio stuff), usually tells you very little about the value of what they say.
[Jaron] Lanier, like Paris Hilton...
I can't begin to explain how funny I find this phrase.
No, the designers decide on what is going to be a disadvantage for the company, not the consumer.
Could you cite an example where credible designers designed a product in ignorance of end-user needs? Or a scenario where being unacceptable for users is advantagous for the company? You're struggling to make a point, but all you've done is state the obvious: "Designers work for companies."
The consumer decides what is and is not an advantage for them.
Yes, and the consumer's way of acting on those decisions is to buy or not buy products accordingly. They don't actually decide the design goals (and in turn, the design) for such products except by demand or lack thereof.
It might be difficult for you to understand that if you've never actuallly designed something for a company.
I have, and I still think you're wrong.
Concept cars are designed with the user in mind, the production model is what happens when they take other considerations.
I think you have it backwards. Concept cars are marketing instruments, first and foremost. They don't have to be designed to do anything that users actually want or need to do. A concept car may go 200 miles per gallon, but not have air conditioning, airbags, or (of all things), a radio. Production cars have to sell, and to sell, they have to fulfil the consumer's needs.
I'm just saying apple like every other company inthe world, has been known to screw the user, for stupid reasons that had nothing to do with the user.
How on earth is making a product that the user doesn't want to buy screwing the user?
my question is whether there will be any barriers to running Linux and Windows
According to Phil Shiller, Apple's VP of Marketing, no, they won't be doing anything to prevent you from running Windows (Fool that ye may be!). That doesn't mean it will be easy or practical or supported or anything, but it's at least been stated that Apple isn't going to intentionally get in your way.
iBook (all with 13.3" widescreen display and integrated graphics - 945GM MCH)
I dobut you'll see any Apple system with Intel's graphics. They've put a lot of energy into Core Image, which requires programmable pixel shaders, and if I remember correctly, Intel's pixel shader support is laughable, with hardly any hardware accelleration. Given that current iBooks do support Core Image, it would be a step backwards. (This, and laughable graphics performance in general.) Not completely impossible, but unlikely.
Also, the main reason to use Intel's graphics support would be to cash in on "Centrino" marketing. I don't think Apple needs or wants to overrun their very strong brands (iBook, PowerBook) with Intel's. The same reason I wouldn't expect to see an "Intel Inside" sticker.
Mini $499: Intel Centrino Duo LV 1.5Ghz
If it's going to be plugged into a wall, there's no reason for the low-voltage version of the chip. The current Mini form factor has plenty of room to disperse the heat of the normal version. I would expect to see the LV version in some kind of ultraportable, if anything.
AFAIK, Apple have never stated that they would move to intel this early.
True, but you have to look at the evidence. Intel just launched Yonah/"Core Duo", a new laptop chip. Unless Apple is waiting a year or more for Merom/Conroe (all-new 64-bit architecture) they will undoubtedly be using Yonah. Why not start as soon as possible?
Also, it isn't completely unheard of for Apple to reveal a product at MacWorld or other events that won't ship for several weeks or even months hence. They win lots of love when they ship the same day, but clearly, they won't waste the highly-anticipated MacWorld keynote on "just speed bumps".
So the designers are the ones that determine what is and is not a disadvantage for me?
Uh, yes. That's part of what you do when you're designing something.
I have no idea what the rest of your post means, but I assure you that nothing I was talking about has anything to do with your girlfriend or your employees, or even you in particular.
Why would I want to carry around two devices if the functionality of one can be added to the other with zero disadvantages?
Whether there really are "zero disadvantages" is left of to the designers of the device, and the goals they have set for it. Given that you can't do to radio most of the things you can do with an iPod (make playlists, pause, skip around, set ratings, listen to over and over again), it doesn't really fit in.
You're confusing dual connections with dual-link. A dual-link connection is required for any resolution over 2048x1536. If you want to drive two monitors over 2048x1536, you need two separate dual-link DVI connections.
Most video cards don't support dual-link at all. Those that do tend to support only one dual-link connection, even if they have two DVI connectors. So, you can only have one 30" display and one smaller (2048x1536 or less) display.
The only current card that I know of that supports two dual-link connections (i.e., can drive two 30" displays) is the nVidia Quattro FX 4500, which costs over $1500.
Gates, Jobs, and the Zen Aesthetic looks at what makes Jobs' presentations so effective, contrasting with the dismal style that comes out of Microsoft.
Regardless of what you think of the products they are selling, or the cult of personality around Steve Jobs, I would recommend this article to anyone that ever has or ever will sit in front of PowerPoint or Keynote or Impress or who will give any presentation of any kind. The contrast is so sharp that I think everyone can learn something from it.
What does this sentence mean? Intel is going to make their own hardware and software now?
I think all it means is that they are focusing on building more strong brands like "Centrino" that can outclass the machine-maker's own. To get people going to the store looking for a "Centrino" or a "Viiv", not a "Pavillion" or "Satellite" or "Inspiron". They basically get to float right over all the competition between Dell/HP/Toshiba/etc. and market themselves straight to the consumer.
The message to the manufacturers is: "Unless you've got a brand stronger than ours (Like, say, "ThinkPad" or "PowerBook"), you're buying our CPUs, our chipsets, our video, our sound, our wireless adapters, and whatever else we tell you to, because we're where the money is."
I think that's what they're trying to do anyway. In my experience, when a big corporation says they are "shifting focus", what they really mean is that they are throwing marketing dollars in a new direction. They don't actually have to do anything different.
Where can one find the the assumptions and circumstances under which these "pretty impressive" results are obtained?
Um, maybe in the article?
Indeed, it is hard to imagine that you can have "identical" notebooks with different chipsets.
"The beauty of the W5F and W5A is that they are virtually identical, with the only real difference being that the former is based on the Napa platform while the latter is a Sonoma notebook. ASUS even went one step further and shipped us notebooks with processors clocked identically - the W5F featured a Core Duo T2400 (1.83GHz) while the W5A featured a Pentium M 750 (1.83GHz)." -- RTFA
Curious how Jobs being buddhist, he is responsible for such slavering of desire (according to the above, amongst the 'ignorant') in the products he works to create
I think you're misreading Buddhism. The Desire and Ignorance spoken of in the passage you quoted are personal in scope. One quenches his own desire, destroys his own ignorance, and thus (eventually) relieves his own suffering.
The desire for the product exists in the individual consumer, who is his own responsibility. Do people really blame Steve Jobs for somehow forcing them to desire things? If you're "suffering" from desire for an iPod, that's your own damn problem.
That said, it is wrong conduct to scheme and pursue gain for it's own sake, and one could argue that these are unavoidable for the CEO of a large corporation, but I suppose that's up to the adherent to decide.
Hm it seems doubtful Apple products are actually the path to spiritual awakening.
What Jobs is ignoring is that Macintosh customers are primarily non-technical, and have no need or want for a "religious war" around programming languages.
What you're ignoring is that Jobs runs a company whose future depends somewhat on what programming languages and APIs they support and the control they have over them.
What the Mac platform needs the most is applications, good ones.
It has them, in scores.
And if the apps are good, the users simply don't care if the language frameworks are slightly faster or nicer to program with.
Graham: I think the way to "solve" the problem of procrastination is to let delight pull you instead of making a to-do list push you.
Ford: The most productive times in my life are the ones where I'm just doing my own thing, focused, and trying to solve some problem that I find interesting-when I'm narrowly distracted.
Why not operate Wikipedia like a software project, and have "stable" and "unstable" branches? Basically, instead of having changes appear instantly, they're queued up on the "unstable" branch until the next release.
A stable release wouldn't have the stubs and heavily contested articles, and would solve a lot of the "moving target" problems that Wikipedia faces. "Unstable" would be more or less what Wikipedia is now.
Yes, it's nice that "anyone can edit", but most people never will. There are several orders of magnitude more readers than authors/editors, but the site itself doesn't reflect that.
Has this been proposed and shot down? Is it just too un-Wiki-like? Or do sites like Answers.com that use Wikipedia's DB dumps take care of this?
No, we THINK we see a lack of a pattern. Not being infinite, we cannot tell if what we see is actually a lack of a pattern, or a small part of a larger pattern.
This makes any belief in the presence or lack of pattern a matter of faith.
Science is based on observation. If we observe no pattern, then we can act on the assumption that there is none, until such a time as scientific observation yields different results.
I don't understand how the lack of mention of God makes something anti-theistic. At best, it makes it agnostic--it does not know if a God exists, nor does it attempt to prove one.
But that's the problem isn't it: it does attempt to prove the lack of existance of one.
You're seem to believe that the concept of randomness is anti-theistic, in which case your disagreement is with much, much, more than evolution. You couldn't possibly "lose" this argument, because you've already decided that observable evidence means nothing. In short, you're not talking about science.
Come one guys. I sure wouldn't be flaunting the it consumes less power then the AMD X2 spec too much
The flaunting isn't that it consumes less power -- it's that it consumes ~40% less power, but gives ~95% of the performance. That isn't a small feat, especially without an on-die memory controller.
You are compairing a "MOBILE" CPU core against a "DESKTOP" CPU core.
What difference does it make? AnandTech's test was of a desktop Yonah system.
Its like saying that a cellphone CPU uses less power then a laptop CPU.
Which would be quite impressive if the cellphone performed the same as the laptop.
Ok, first off, gates is spending research dollars on AIDS, while also funding malaria eradiaction. The chance of eradicating malaria is blah blah blah blah blah blah blah....
You don't know what you're talking about. First, you're clinging to an absolute definition of eradicate which is never used in this context. Secondly, you're assuming that efforts to eradicate it in the areas in which it is presently a serious problem are fruitless if it continues to exist anywhere else, which is provably wrong. Malaria was eradicated from the US fifty years ago, and it's been driven out of plenty of other places as well. This is not impossible.
In contrast, building a train that is energy efficient, AND fills a niche between aircrafts and cars will change the world.
In that case there should be plenty of financial incentive for someone to do it, shouldn't there? Charity is not an investment. Investments are not charity.
Think of how much Eisenhower's highway system allowed America to grow rapidly.
Think of how much harder it would have been to build if they'd had to deal with malaria. Think about another economy-boosting transportation project: the Panama Canal. One of the biggest reasons the US succeeded where the French failed was a concerted mosquito/malaria/yellow fever control program. Think of how rapidly other nations will grow when they aren't suffering continual epidemics of preventable diseases.
Finally, consider if the gate's AIDs research works. Then we will have a massive population explosion. It would be good to have jobs at lower energy costs available all over the world.
You have no idea what you are talking about, and your conclusion that a maglev train from New York to Chicago is going to provide jobs all over the world makes me wish there were a way to punch you in the face over the internet. All my attempts to consider how you came to such a conclusion have resulted in fainting.
Slashdot Mirror
Thanks Steve, but the Associated Press has been standardized on pheed for well over a year now.
Have they been using iPhoto, too? Gee, maybe there's room in the world for more than one way to put photos in RSS feeds. Flickr has been publishing RSS and Atom feeds of photos since 2004, and they don't use Pheed.
I like how Apple reinvents pheed and calls it "Photocasting" as well as "incredibly new".
Pheed is just a specification (for what, 2 elements?), and a not terribly exciting app. That iPhoto now implements something one could do with Pheed doesn't make the feature of publishing and subscribing to RSS feeds within the app any less "new". For all you know, iPhoto uses Pheed, The fact that it wouldn't make a difference one way or the other if it did says something about how important Pheed is.
From the commentary on the various live feeds, it sound more like Apple re-invented Flickr.
.Mac, and the person you want to share with uses iPhoto, you can basically feed images straight from your iPhoto to theirs. No email, no web pages, no nothin'.
More or less, yeah, but they've taken the 80% task of photo sharing and made it even easier and more direct than Flickr or email, within some constraints. If you've got
I think that's pretty cool, even if it's not utterly groundbreaking. I would expect more photo apps to add this exact feature (both publishing and subscribing) in the near future. Up until now the publishing has all been by uploading your pictures to Flickr (or elsewhere), and the subscribing has all been in newsreaders designed around text.
That's why I've never used the iTunes store and never will. I don't have to worry that five years from now I'll have a hard drive crash, or ten years from now I'll lose a password, and all my music purchases will be gone forever. I'm only going to buy music if it's mine for life, and if I can quickly and easily backup my music library whenever I wish.
Um...you can easily back up your music library whenever you wish. iTunes DRM doesn't prevent you from copying the files at all. You can put them on another disk, another computer, a CD/DVD, upload them to an FTP server and let the world mirror them, etc.
Technologically speaking, the iPod is not that great.
And realisticly speaking, technology is never the only factor in the success of a product. I can't fathom why so many people seem to not get that.
To bring this back on-topic, the e-ink tech in Sony's reader is pretty badass, but the product itself, with the usual Sony DRM and poor software, will probably suck. Instead of exploiting the advantages an e-book has over physical books, they're bogging it down with a lot of disadvantages.
Unless I'm simply ignorant of Lanier's accomplishments, why should we listen to anything he has to say?
Maybe I'm just strange, but I tend to care more about people's ideas than their accomplishments. Of course you should exercise some skepticism about whether they are really qualified to make some statements, and so on, but whether they worked at company X or company Y or have how many degrees (the usual bio stuff), usually tells you very little about the value of what they say.
[Jaron] Lanier, like Paris Hilton...
I can't begin to explain how funny I find this phrase.
The whole "software is brittle" agenda is cleary his own.
Generally it's a lot easier for people to write about subjects that they are interestested in, and on opinions they hold. Why the surprise?
No, the designers decide on what is going to be a disadvantage for the company, not the consumer.
Could you cite an example where credible designers designed a product in ignorance of end-user needs? Or a scenario where being unacceptable for users is advantagous for the company? You're struggling to make a point, but all you've done is state the obvious: "Designers work for companies."
The consumer decides what is and is not an advantage for them.
Yes, and the consumer's way of acting on those decisions is to buy or not buy products accordingly. They don't actually decide the design goals (and in turn, the design) for such products except by demand or lack thereof.
It might be difficult for you to understand that if you've never actuallly designed something for a company.
I have, and I still think you're wrong.
Concept cars are designed with the user in mind, the production model is what happens when they take other considerations.
I think you have it backwards. Concept cars are marketing instruments, first and foremost. They don't have to be designed to do anything that users actually want or need to do. A concept car may go 200 miles per gallon, but not have air conditioning, airbags, or (of all things), a radio. Production cars have to sell, and to sell, they have to fulfil the consumer's needs.
I'm just saying apple like every other company inthe world, has been known to screw the user, for stupid reasons that had nothing to do with the user.
How on earth is making a product that the user doesn't want to buy screwing the user?
my question is whether there will be any barriers to running Linux and Windows
According to Phil Shiller, Apple's VP of Marketing, no, they won't be doing anything to prevent you from running Windows (Fool that ye may be!). That doesn't mean it will be easy or practical or supported or anything, but it's at least been stated that Apple isn't going to intentionally get in your way.
iBook (all with 13.3" widescreen display and integrated graphics - 945GM MCH)
I dobut you'll see any Apple system with Intel's graphics. They've put a lot of energy into Core Image, which requires programmable pixel shaders, and if I remember correctly, Intel's pixel shader support is laughable, with hardly any hardware accelleration. Given that current iBooks do support Core Image, it would be a step backwards. (This, and laughable graphics performance in general.) Not completely impossible, but unlikely.
Also, the main reason to use Intel's graphics support would be to cash in on "Centrino" marketing. I don't think Apple needs or wants to overrun their very strong brands (iBook, PowerBook) with Intel's. The same reason I wouldn't expect to see an "Intel Inside" sticker.
Mini $499: Intel Centrino Duo LV 1.5Ghz
If it's going to be plugged into a wall, there's no reason for the low-voltage version of the chip. The current Mini form factor has plenty of room to disperse the heat of the normal version. I would expect to see the LV version in some kind of ultraportable, if anything.
AFAIK, Apple have never stated that they would move to intel this early.
True, but you have to look at the evidence. Intel just launched Yonah/"Core Duo", a new laptop chip. Unless Apple is waiting a year or more for Merom/Conroe (all-new 64-bit architecture) they will undoubtedly be using Yonah. Why not start as soon as possible?
Also, it isn't completely unheard of for Apple to reveal a product at MacWorld or other events that won't ship for several weeks or even months hence. They win lots of love when they ship the same day, but clearly, they won't waste the highly-anticipated MacWorld keynote on "just speed bumps".
So the designers are the ones that determine what is and is not a disadvantage for me?
Uh, yes. That's part of what you do when you're designing something.
I have no idea what the rest of your post means, but I assure you that nothing I was talking about has anything to do with your girlfriend or your employees, or even you in particular.
Why would I want to carry around two devices if the functionality of one can be added to the other with zero disadvantages?
Whether there really are "zero disadvantages" is left of to the designers of the device, and the goals they have set for it. Given that you can't do to radio most of the things you can do with an iPod (make playlists, pause, skip around, set ratings, listen to over and over again), it doesn't really fit in.
You're confusing dual connections with dual-link. A dual-link connection is required for any resolution over 2048x1536. If you want to drive two monitors over 2048x1536, you need two separate dual-link DVI connections.
Most video cards don't support dual-link at all. Those that do tend to support only one dual-link connection, even if they have two DVI connectors. So, you can only have one 30" display and one smaller (2048x1536 or less) display.
The only current card that I know of that supports two dual-link connections (i.e., can drive two 30" displays) is the nVidia Quattro FX 4500, which costs over $1500.
Either way saving $300 over some silver plastic is a good deal.
The Apple display is made of aluminum, not plastic.
Gates, Jobs, and the Zen Aesthetic looks at what makes Jobs' presentations so effective, contrasting with the dismal style that comes out of Microsoft.
Regardless of what you think of the products they are selling, or the cult of personality around Steve Jobs, I would recommend this article to anyone that ever has or ever will sit in front of PowerPoint or Keynote or Impress or who will give any presentation of any kind. The contrast is so sharp that I think everyone can learn something from it.
What does this sentence mean? Intel is going to make their own hardware and software now?
I think all it means is that they are focusing on building more strong brands like "Centrino" that can outclass the machine-maker's own. To get people going to the store looking for a "Centrino" or a "Viiv", not a "Pavillion" or "Satellite" or "Inspiron". They basically get to float right over all the competition between Dell/HP/Toshiba/etc. and market themselves straight to the consumer.
The message to the manufacturers is: "Unless you've got a brand stronger than ours (Like, say, "ThinkPad" or "PowerBook"), you're buying our CPUs, our chipsets, our video, our sound, our wireless adapters, and whatever else we tell you to, because we're where the money is."
I think that's what they're trying to do anyway. In my experience, when a big corporation says they are "shifting focus", what they really mean is that they are throwing marketing dollars in a new direction. They don't actually have to do anything different.
Where can one find the the assumptions and circumstances under which these "pretty impressive" results are obtained?
Um, maybe in the article?
Indeed, it is hard to imagine that you can have "identical" notebooks with different chipsets.
"The beauty of the W5F and W5A is that they are virtually identical, with the only real difference being that the former is based on the Napa platform while the latter is a Sonoma notebook. ASUS even went one step further and shipped us notebooks with processors clocked identically - the W5F featured a Core Duo T2400 (1.83GHz) while the W5A featured a Pentium M 750 (1.83GHz)." -- RTFA
Curious how Jobs being buddhist, he is responsible for such slavering of desire (according to the above, amongst the 'ignorant') in the products he works to create
I think you're misreading Buddhism. The Desire and Ignorance spoken of in the passage you quoted are personal in scope. One quenches his own desire, destroys his own ignorance, and thus (eventually) relieves his own suffering.
The desire for the product exists in the individual consumer, who is his own responsibility. Do people really blame Steve Jobs for somehow forcing them to desire things? If you're "suffering" from desire for an iPod, that's your own damn problem.
That said, it is wrong conduct to scheme and pursue gain for it's own sake, and one could argue that these are unavoidable for the CEO of a large corporation, but I suppose that's up to the adherent to decide.
Hm it seems doubtful Apple products are actually the path to spiritual awakening.
Who ever claimed they were?
But, fine, Jobs ran a company down from a 10% marketshare down to a 2% share
That's quite a claim given that he wasn't even at Apple while that was happening.
What Jobs is ignoring is that Macintosh customers are primarily non-technical, and have no need or want for a "religious war" around programming languages.
What you're ignoring is that Jobs runs a company whose future depends somewhat on what programming languages and APIs they support and the control they have over them.
What the Mac platform needs the most is applications, good ones.
It has them, in scores.
And if the apps are good, the users simply don't care if the language frameworks are slightly faster or nicer to program with.
Exactly. That's why Cocoa is good enough.
Paul Graham's thoughts on procrastination overlap well with Paul Ford's thoughts on distractions, Followup/Distraction, and Are there "good" distractions?.
Graham:
I think the way to "solve" the problem of procrastination is to let delight pull you instead of making a to-do list push you.
Ford:
The most productive times in my life are the ones where I'm just doing my own thing, focused, and trying to solve some problem that I find interesting-when I'm narrowly distracted.
Same idea, different angle.
Why not operate Wikipedia like a software project, and have "stable" and "unstable" branches? Basically, instead of having changes appear instantly, they're queued up on the "unstable" branch until the next release.
A stable release wouldn't have the stubs and heavily contested articles, and would solve a lot of the "moving target" problems that Wikipedia faces. "Unstable" would be more or less what Wikipedia is now.
Yes, it's nice that "anyone can edit", but most people never will. There are several orders of magnitude more readers than authors/editors, but the site itself doesn't reflect that.
Has this been proposed and shot down? Is it just too un-Wiki-like? Or do sites like Answers.com that use Wikipedia's DB dumps take care of this?
No, we THINK we see a lack of a pattern. Not being infinite, we cannot tell if what we see is actually a lack of a pattern, or a small part of a larger pattern.
This makes any belief in the presence or lack of pattern a matter of faith.
Science is based on observation. If we observe no pattern, then we can act on the assumption that there is none, until such a time as scientific observation yields different results.
I don't understand how the lack of mention of God makes something anti-theistic. At best, it makes it agnostic--it does not know if a God exists, nor does it attempt to prove one.
But that's the problem isn't it: it does attempt to prove the lack of existance of one.
You're seem to believe that the concept of randomness is anti-theistic, in which case your disagreement is with much, much, more than evolution. You couldn't possibly "lose" this argument, because you've already decided that observable evidence means nothing. In short, you're not talking about science.
Come one guys. I sure wouldn't be flaunting the it consumes less power then the AMD X2 spec too much
The flaunting isn't that it consumes less power -- it's that it consumes ~40% less power, but gives ~95% of the performance. That isn't a small feat, especially without an on-die memory controller.
You are compairing a "MOBILE" CPU core against a "DESKTOP" CPU core.
What difference does it make? AnandTech's test was of a desktop Yonah system.
Its like saying that a cellphone CPU uses less power then a laptop CPU.
Which would be quite impressive if the cellphone performed the same as the laptop.
Ok, first off, gates is spending research dollars on AIDS, while also funding malaria eradiaction. The chance of eradicating malaria is blah blah blah blah blah blah blah....
You don't know what you're talking about. First, you're clinging to an absolute definition of eradicate which is never used in this context. Secondly, you're assuming that efforts to eradicate it in the areas in which it is presently a serious problem are fruitless if it continues to exist anywhere else, which is provably wrong. Malaria was eradicated from the US fifty years ago, and it's been driven out of plenty of other places as well. This is not impossible.
In contrast, building a train that is energy efficient, AND fills a niche between aircrafts and cars will change the world.
In that case there should be plenty of financial incentive for someone to do it, shouldn't there? Charity is not an investment. Investments are not charity.
Think of how much Eisenhower's highway system allowed America to grow rapidly.
Think of how much harder it would have been to build if they'd had to deal with malaria. Think about another economy-boosting transportation project: the Panama Canal. One of the biggest reasons the US succeeded where the French failed was a concerted mosquito/malaria/yellow fever control program. Think of how rapidly other nations will grow when they aren't suffering continual epidemics of preventable diseases.
Finally, consider if the gate's AIDs research works. Then we will have a massive population explosion. It would be good to have jobs at lower energy costs available all over the world.
You have no idea what you are talking about, and your conclusion that a maglev train from New York to Chicago is going to provide jobs all over the world makes me wish there were a way to punch you in the face over the internet. All my attempts to consider how you came to such a conclusion have resulted in fainting.