Hmm, although the the term PC was originally coined to refer to any microcomputer, with the advent of IBM's x86, it's become synonymous with IBM compatible systems.
Personal computer, IBM PC, or IBM PC compatible... A personal computer is an inexpensive microcomputer, originally designed to be used by only one person at a time, and which is IBM PC compatible - (though in common usage it may sometimes refer to non-compatible machines).
So although you're technically correct, general convention would disagree with you.
For a common user, a PC is x86 and a Mac is well, a Mac - it's as bad as arguing on what a hacker is - according to the rest of the world, a hacker is a mean guy, no matter how much we try to convince them otherwise.
I do not mean to say you are wrong, merely that it's sometimes better to stick to well-agreed upon conventions. Makes life easier.
Google is numero uno in search, and is most certainly the one ubiquitous website that everyone visits. If anyone would know the distribution of OSes, it would be these guys.
Maybe you do have a valid, albeit disappointing, point:)
I dont' remember who said this - it was either Ken Thompson or Dennis Ritchie - but I use whatever serves my needs best.
One thing I've noticed about Mac users is that they go in a lot more for the coolness factor and the "attitude" than most other users.
As someone who uses PC and Macs almost equally, I would like to say that there are times when a mac serves my needs, and there are times when either Winows or Linux serves my needs. I can never understand people who say that they would use ONLY a Mac and would never touch a Windows system in their lives.
Why?
I mean, if it serves your needs and has utilitarian and economic value, what's the big deal? Computers are nothing more than sophisticated tools. Sure, you're entitled to your favourite brand of pliers but that does not make your plier any better. The attitude that my plier is better than yours borders on the ridiculous.
Guess what?
You can indeed get a PC with all the features that you mentioned, both software and hardware.
I grew up on an Apple Lisa II, and I've realized over the years that it does not matter what you use to get your work done, as long as the work gets done.
And to answer your original question, Macs are indeed alternate systems - you should look up the dictionary sometime, alternate is anything that's not mainstream.
And I would say that PCs are definitely mainstream, no matter what you may believe.
The day Steve Jobs would let me do what I want with MY system and give me the freedom of choosing my own hardware configuration, I'll give kudos to Apple. Until such a time, PCs rock.
They are cheap, affordable, customizable and ubiquitious. And they will be, for a long long time to go.
The problem with the consequent SW series (after the first three) is that you know the story, there isn't much you can do.
That and Jar Jar.
*shudder*
Several other trilogies where you knew/could guess at the ending have done well, however Lucas should have stopped with the first three.
But hey, he was (and is continuing) to milk the SW cow for all it's worth and that's where the problem lies - I'm sure if Lucas were to make a ONE episode movie as a prequel and a ONE episode movie as a sequel to the original trilogy, it would not have been half this bad.
Phantom menace was okay since it was the first of the prequels, but Attack of the Clones had a feeling of being dragged on and you were like, yawn, so fucking what.
Well, I've heard that genetic data is huge -- but have never encountered any first hand.
However I do have first hand experience with particle physics data, and yes those are HUGE. Those are really unweildy and have a lot of work that need to be done on them.
Some of the particle accelerators on an average generate a few TBs for every collision experiment, and those are pretty huge numbers.
Contrary to popular belief, areas like Biology and Physics indeed do have a lot of data that needs to be transmitted for research.
Look at gene sequences for instance -- those things are huge. Particular physics experiments generate statistical data that are of the order of gigabytes.
This most certainly makes a lot of sense, and hopefully it should be widespread, just as how the research and academia helped kickstart the original Internet in the first place =)
On the other hand, there is no list of the labs and research facilities that would be connected by this network. That would be nice to see.
"In June 2003, Keyhole further defined its leadership position with funding from In-Q-Tel and deployment by NIMA, the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, one of the most prominent users of earth imagery and information."
Come on, this is Slashdot. That was just a typical, "IANAMBA, but I do play on one Slashdot" comment.
Somehow people here think that they know what's better for a multi-million dollar corporation with some of the smartest minds than the corporation itself.
Lawsuits where a small company would rather give in than fight.
When IBM sues you and sends in a bunch of their very best lawyers, you seldom fight. You or your investors would seldom dare risk open confrontation - they next move would be to move into the boardroom and negotiate.
What did the anti-trust things do to Microsoft? Effectively NOTHING. It killed off Netscape.
Lawyers are expensive, and so are court-room fees. Do you really think that small companies could stand a chance against companies whose policies are defeatist by nature, with a few billion dollars in the bank?
Ma-Bell had a monopoly because they were the effectively the first people to establish such a huge network.
No, I'm not talking merely in terms of coverage and areas. I'm in talking in terms of financial power and effectively arm-twisting capabilities.
Look at them - Microsoft, AOL-Time Warner, Cingular-AT&T, etc. They effectively control a large chunk of the media. You must be smoking something if you think that these guys can't squash a small player if they didn't like them.
It's not like AOL had anything other than Internet service, and it's not like Warner has anything other than entertainment. But they are effectively a single company, and that's what is scary.
I was talking of the phenomenon of large-mergers, which could be stiffling to smaller companies simply because all it would take is a bunch of lawsuits to kill innovation. We already see it happening.
Btw, more choices is not a bad thing, it's a good thing.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, mine did finish downloading, so here you go -
2 004.wmv
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~metlin/LunarEclipse-10-
I would appreciate it if you'd be easy on the server, though =)
And btw, it's quite a cool video, but it would have been cooler still if it were more of a close-up. At that distance, it looks a little obscure.
Hell, I'm a subscriber and the server was dead even when it was for subscribers-only - I was hardly getting 1 KBPS.
:-/
It would be nice if some of the others who've gotten it would provide a mirror
Hmm, although the the term PC was originally coined to refer to any microcomputer, with the advent of IBM's x86, it's become synonymous with IBM compatible systems.
Even Wikipedia's entry mentions PC as -
Personal computer, IBM PC, or IBM PC compatible
A personal computer is an inexpensive microcomputer, originally designed to be used by only one person at a time, and which is IBM PC compatible - (though in common usage it may sometimes refer to non-compatible machines).
So although you're technically correct, general convention would disagree with you.
For a common user, a PC is x86 and a Mac is well, a Mac - it's as bad as arguing on what a hacker is - according to the rest of the world, a hacker is a mean guy, no matter how much we try to convince them otherwise.
I do not mean to say you are wrong, merely that it's sometimes better to stick to well-agreed upon conventions. Makes life easier.
Damn, where is the_mad_poster when we need him?
Well, I'm a Ricer and a Gentoo fan, you insensitive clod.
x-(
Okay, am kidding. I just drive a rickety old Toyota and use Windows ME.
It's not people getting voted that I'm afraid of, it's Dubya getting voted that's scary ;-)
This is more insightful than funny.
:)
Google is numero uno in search, and is most certainly the one ubiquitous website that everyone visits. If anyone would know the distribution of OSes, it would be these guys.
Maybe you do have a valid, albeit disappointing, point
I dont' remember who said this - it was either Ken Thompson or Dennis Ritchie - but I use whatever serves my needs best.
One thing I've noticed about Mac users is that they go in a lot more for the coolness factor and the "attitude" than most other users.
As someone who uses PC and Macs almost equally, I would like to say that there are times when a mac serves my needs, and there are times when either Winows or Linux serves my needs. I can never understand people who say that they would use ONLY a Mac and would never touch a Windows system in their lives.
Why?
I mean, if it serves your needs and has utilitarian and economic value, what's the big deal? Computers are nothing more than sophisticated tools. Sure, you're entitled to your favourite brand of pliers but that does not make your plier any better. The attitude that my plier is better than yours borders on the ridiculous.
Guess what?
You can indeed get a PC with all the features that you mentioned, both software and hardware.
I grew up on an Apple Lisa II, and I've realized over the years that it does not matter what you use to get your work done, as long as the work gets done.
And to answer your original question, Macs are indeed alternate systems - you should look up the dictionary sometime, alternate is anything that's not mainstream.
And I would say that PCs are definitely mainstream, no matter what you may believe.
The day Steve Jobs would let me do what I want with MY system and give me the freedom of choosing my own hardware configuration, I'll give kudos to Apple. Until such a time, PCs rock.
They are cheap, affordable, customizable and ubiquitious. And they will be, for a long long time to go.
From the source-code of the site --No wonder -- the word ShadowCrew does not render properly in Firefox =)
Come on you guys at Secret Service!!! Use a good browser guys
Yeah, but some of it is scary --
Proxies, VPNs, IP Spoofing, Encryption, etc....You Are No Longer Anonymous!!
Yup, that's always good when it's the bad guys who're being affected, despite all this.
But pray, what about the good citizens? Or maybe the argument goes that if I'm a good citizen, I've no business wanting all this?
Hmmm....
You can't simply delete EVIL.
;)
So sayeth a poster whose nick is Dark Lord Seth =)
Can you say irony?
It was a let down but not bad.
The problem with the consequent SW series (after the first three) is that you know the story, there isn't much you can do.
That and Jar Jar.
*shudder*
Several other trilogies where you knew/could guess at the ending have done well, however Lucas should have stopped with the first three.
But hey, he was (and is continuing) to milk the SW cow for all it's worth and that's where the problem lies - I'm sure if Lucas were to make a ONE episode movie as a prequel and a ONE episode movie as a sequel to the original trilogy, it would not have been half this bad.
Phantom menace was okay since it was the first of the prequels, but Attack of the Clones had a feeling of being dragged on and you were like, yawn, so fucking what.
No, for one it was suicidegirls and not bignaturals.
;-)
For another, no offence to Taco watching pr0n would anyday be a higher priority than Rob Malda
Well, I've heard that genetic data is huge -- but have never encountered any first hand.
However I do have first hand experience with particle physics data, and yes those are HUGE. Those are really unweildy and have a lot of work that need to be done on them.
Some of the particle accelerators on an average generate a few TBs for every collision experiment, and those are pretty huge numbers.
w00t!
Thanks! Just happy that my school (GTech) is on the list =)
That's Newscientist and Wired btw.
They're quite used to the Slashdot effect, and there is no way they're going to go down that easily.
If you must provide a backup, at the very least provide a coralized link or a google cache.
Nice try though.
Contrary to popular belief, areas like Biology and Physics indeed do have a lot of data that needs to be transmitted for research.
Look at gene sequences for instance -- those things are huge. Particular physics experiments generate statistical data that are of the order of gigabytes.
This most certainly makes a lot of sense, and hopefully it should be widespread, just as how the research and academia helped kickstart the original Internet in the first place =)
On the other hand, there is no list of the labs and research facilities that would be connected by this network. That would be nice to see.
If memory serves me right I think the CIA bought like 10% of that company because of the detailed flyby maps of cities do to elivations.
:)
You're partly right - one of their investors is In-Q-Tel, the investment arm of the CIA.
From their company's website -
"In June 2003, Keyhole further defined its leadership position with funding from In-Q-Tel and deployment by NIMA, the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, one of the most prominent users of earth imagery and information."
Should prove interesting. Google + CIA, hmm
Come on, this is Slashdot. That was just a typical, "IANAMBA, but I do play on one Slashdot" comment.
Somehow people here think that they know what's better for a multi-million dollar corporation with some of the smartest minds than the corporation itself.
Heh.
Depends.
;)
Who's your Daddy, girl?
Aussie pimp, hard at work ;)
Cheers, moyt!
What's the difference?
You're == You are.
I don't see how the poster is wrong.
Would have added you as a friend if you had not posted AC :-)
Brilliant post!
Lawsuits where a small company would rather give in than fight.
When IBM sues you and sends in a bunch of their very best lawyers, you seldom fight. You or your investors would seldom dare risk open confrontation - they next move would be to move into the boardroom and negotiate.
What did the anti-trust things do to Microsoft? Effectively NOTHING. It killed off Netscape.
Lawyers are expensive, and so are court-room fees. Do you really think that small companies could stand a chance against companies whose policies are defeatist by nature, with a few billion dollars in the bank?
You misunderstand me.
Ma-Bell had a monopoly because they were the effectively the first people to establish such a huge network.
No, I'm not talking merely in terms of coverage and areas. I'm in talking in terms of financial power and effectively arm-twisting capabilities.
Look at them - Microsoft, AOL-Time Warner, Cingular-AT&T, etc. They effectively control a large chunk of the media. You must be smoking something if you think that these guys can't squash a small player if they didn't like them.
It's not like AOL had anything other than Internet service, and it's not like Warner has anything other than entertainment. But they are effectively a single company, and that's what is scary.
I was talking of the phenomenon of large-mergers, which could be stiffling to smaller companies simply because all it would take is a bunch of lawsuits to kill innovation. We already see it happening.
Btw, more choices is not a bad thing, it's a good thing.