"For instance, you might write a multi-cpu aware game by doing the physics in one thread and the graphics in a second thread."
Actually, most games are already written like this, but they are not multithreaded. Most games rely heavily on the GPU for - well - graphical processing. More and more of the work has been offloaded to the GPU in recent years. The CPU is for physics and other game functionality.
"Muslim moderates aren't obligated to feel outrage over the extremists, especially not for your benefit."
Right, just like I'm not obligated to feel outrage over the prisoner abuse in Iraq.
Except that I do. Beacause I'm a person who wants to stand by my principles and who opposes torture, even if it is done by US soldiers.
Sorry, but if moderate Muslims are against terrorism, then why *aren't* they outraged. If you aren't outraged, then you are essentially condoning the terrorism.
I don't believe in a black-and-white world. It is perfectly acceptable for others to hate the United States. We have done a lot of things that are not acceptable. I am outraged at what we are doing right now.
But terrorism is unacceptable. Just is it's not OK for the Isrelis to bomb apartments, it's not acceptable for Palestinains to bomb Isreli restaurants. It's not OK for you to kill another human except in extremely limited circumstances (and, yes, I am against capital punishment).
If you cannot take a stand against torture and murder, then what do you stand for? If you cannot feel outraged that your people are killing innocent people, if you cannot feel outraged at the decapitation of an American soldier, then what do you stand for?
Muslim moderates *ARE* obligated to take a stand against extremism. It is *NOT* acceptable to stand quietly while such unacceptable acts are commited. Just as I am obligated to take a stand against the actions of US soldiers (and to take a stand against US policy), Muslims are obligated to take a stand against murder.
Unless, of course, they believe it is acceptable.
Sidenote:
I agree that Christians aren't exactly clean either. Religous extremeists are dangerous whatever their belif system is. Conservative Christians scare me as well - I, for one, believe that religion and politics should stay distinctly seperate.
Re:Message from the Extreme Conclusions Club
on
RIP G4 PowerMac
·
· Score: 0, Troll
"What happens when you need to buy more computers?
I've got a G4 I'll swap for a G5, runs OS 9 beautifully.
I've also got an OS 9 capable iBook I'll gladly swap for a new PowerBook.
Let me know if you're serious and not just blowing hot air."
Right, because "swapping" computers is an acceptable option in a corporate environment.
There are reasons why corporations don't just "load Debian" or "buy hardware on eBay" or "swap hardware" with employees. Corporations need stable, supported hardware that will run their legacy applications. What if the system they get in the swap breaks the next day? What if it's stolen property?
Slashdot doesn't get this, but what's acceptable to an individual *does not fly* in a corporate environment. Corporations can't just buy 500 notebooks on eBay to equip new workers.
HP, for example, can deliver hardware that's tested, warranteed, supported, and, most important, homogenous. When a school system buys 2000 new PCs to run Windows 2000 (which predates OS X), they know that every PC will be the same, every PC will be working out of the box (or will be replaced quickly), and that every PC will be supported in two years. They also know that any applications they buy will still work in five years. More importantly, they know that they will still be able to run Windows 2000. The same district has about 3,000 pre-OSX macs. They are being phased out because it simply costs too much to retrain all of the teachers to use OS X, and because it's impossible to buy pre-OSX Macs anymore (the district never purchased G4s because of cost, so it has been impossible to buy a non-OSX mac since the iMac was phased out - they don't buy notebooks either).
The HP computers ship with Windows XP. The district installs Windows 2000 instead. Why? Becuase Windows 2000 is stable and supported. There is no need to change infastructure, no need to retrain teachers, and no need to support two platforms. PCs give them that option.
Next year, the entire district will run XP (the site license gives them the right to run either XP or 2000). The upgrade will be massive, but it won't fundamentally change the system. XP works fine with the old Windows 2000 servers. 2000 works fine with the new Windows 2003 servers. The classic UI replicates Windows 2000 perfectly. Most teachers won't even notice the change. XP is that compatible. OS X is not. OS X requires new training, new applications (unless you want to use Classic, which isn't exactly a great solution), new servers, and new machines. It would be impossible for a 100% OS 8/9 district to become a 100% OS X district. The all-in-one (and beige) G3s simply do not work correctly on OS X. The PII 233s work fine under Windows XP.
Re:Message from the Extreme Conclusions Club
on
RIP G4 PowerMac
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
"Will there necessarily be driver support for anything in your new Dell configuration under Windows 98?
Very possibly not.
Hell, I remember when I tried to take a Gateway laptop back from Windows Me to Windows 98 - total disaster. There was no display driver in existence for it under 98."
If you Dell has an Intel chipset (like every single Dell produced), then, yes, you will be able to find drivers for Windows 98.
If your system has a VIA, NVIDIA, Intel, or ATI chipset, and an Intel, VIA (S3), NVIDIA, or ATI graphics adaptor, you will have no problems finding drivers for your system.
"Hell, I remember when I tried to take a Gateway laptop back from Windows Me to Windows 98 - total disaster. There was no display driver in existence for it under 98."
If your Gateway had an Intel chipset (and integrated graphics), as most notebooks do, then you should have no problem finding drivers on the Intel website.
Here's a driver for the Intel 845/865/875 video chipset (for Windows 98):
"I guess he means when the "motherboard fries". Still, if your Mac's still under warrenty, of course Apple would replace it. If it's not, that's your problem. It wouldn't be any different with a PC."
Except that you could buy a new PC that's 100% compatible with your old system.
I frankly find this puzzling. T-Mobile has simply provided the best customer service I have *ever* experienced with a service provider.
Hold times are short (under 5 minutes), the CSRs are pretty competent (and they transfer you to level 2 when they know they are out of their league), and the staff is always polite.
Frankly, Comcast isn't bad either. Neither is DirecTV. I don't see what everyone is complaining about (except with Qwest - they put you on hold for an hour and then explain that their DSL network is down and will be down for the next two days).
The problem is that people expect too much. You can't expect level 1 CSRs to be able to fix every problem.
Here are my "rules":
- Act dumb, but not too dumb. If your GPRS WAP service is out, say that you can't connect to [[branded GPRS service name]] and read off the error messege. Let them run through their script and transfer you to someone who can help.
- Be polite. You get excellent results if you say "Thank You" and use a polite tone of voice. Remember, it's not the CSRs fault that your service sucks.
- Don't expect too much. You shouldn't expect a CSR to give you six months of free service because your coverage sucks. Nor should you expect to have your contract revoked.
- Play CSR Russian Roulette. If you don't get what you want, call back. You'll get a new CSR and can try your routine again. This works particularly well for scoring discounted (or free) service when you have network outage issues.
And finally, some tips about wireless:
- Don't expect too much. Your phone, particularly if it's in the PCS spectrum (most GSM, Sprint) will have trouble inside buildings, paritcularly if they are metal. Your best bets for coverage inside are Verizon or Nextel (800mhz, penetrates walls better).
- Don't buy GSM (in the US) unless you know what you are doing. I love my T-Mobile service, but it is not something that I would rely on. GSM networks in the US simply do not provide the quality of service and coverage of CDMA-based networks. You can get good deals with GSM (particularly with T-Mobile - $20 unlimited GPRS; $50 2-phone plan with plenty of minutes), but you must understand that you will not always have service, particularly indoors or in rural areas.
- Stay away from AT&T. Their GSM network is, quite frankly, crap. Not that T-Mobile's is much better, but at least T-Mobile has cheap data. AT&T's customer service is also awful.
- Stay away from Sprint. Verizon CDMA isn't any more expensive and it is far more reliable and comprehensive.
- Go Verizon if you need dependable service. Verizon's CDMA is simply unmatched in terms of reliability and coverage. I had Verizon (CDMA2000, not AMPS) service in Yellowstone National Park.
- Get a good phone. Do research. A good phone makes all the difference. T-Mobile is actually pretty decent with a 1.2W Nokia phone (Nokia 3590). With the 600mW T300 (or the Sidekick with the crappy radio chipset) it is practically useless.
- Test out your service during the free trial. T-Mobile, for example, gives you 14 days to opt-out of the contract. They are throwing you a bone here - you have the perfect chance to see whether their service is acceptable. Go to the tough locations; everywhere you would use your phone on a regular basis, call 611, and keep going through the phone tree (for T-Mobile, you can hit # every 30 or so seconds and it will read you your minute usage indefinately). Listen, walk around, and check to see if the audio quality is acceptable (or if the call drops). You don't have to pay for the minutes.
"You "could" run XP comfortably on a 400MHz K6-2 w/ 128MB RAM or you DO run it comfortably? If you are running XP comfortately on that hardware, you simply aren't running XP. It just isn't possible without serious tweaking. XP alone needs about 128MB of RAM BEFORE you run any apps."
Baloney. I have XP Pro here, and it is using a total of 102MB of memory for the kernel plus all processes (including explorer.exe). Moreover, *half* of that is paged. Remember, no apps are running and there is plenty of memory. The system is running fine but is only using around 50MB of nonpaged memory.
I have XP Professional here on a system with 1GB of memory.
Nope, sorry.
Serious tweaking means turning off unnecessary services and effects, essentially making XP into Windows 2000.
I was helping out a lady in Circuit City to choose a computer. We found an excellent Compaq (2.5GHz Celeron, 40GB drive - fine for her basic needs). However, the Compaq had 128M of DDR. I was trying to show her how slow it would be without more memory, but I couldn't do it. IE, Windows Media Player, Microsoft Works - they all loaded pretty quickly and ran well.
Now, I told her to get the memory anyway. Once that thing gets Norton and other memory-chugging programs on it, she'll be happy that she has the memory. But it ran fine with only 128M.
Try it sometime:
1: Disable visual styles. 2: Disable system restore. 3: Run "msconfig". Disable all startup apps (not services, but the apps that run when you log in and usually appear in the system tray). 4: Run a virus and spyware scan to ensure that your system is clean. 5: Remove all but 128M of memory in your system.
Remember, XP is *agressive* about swap.
** XP swaps even when it has plenty of free memory **
This is not a bad thing. Paging out unused code (like the print spooling service) allows the system to allocate more memory for disk cache. When I need that service, it can be paged back in - it only takes a second.
So, when you say that the system is using 128MB of memory, you're right (mostly - it's closer to 100M in reality). But most of that memory is paged, so there is plenty of leftover memory to run applications.
I have run Windows 2000 on a system with 64MB of memory. It's not exactly fun, but it runs well enough to do a PowerPoint presentation and surf the web.
"EXCUSE ME? XP starts swapping as soon as you start ANYTHING. If you look at it's memory footprint out of the box it requires just at 128MB after boot. As soon as you try to use it it's swapping.
XP is comfortable at 256Mb and above."
That's INTENTIONAL. XP is extremely agressive about swapping. That's because it's not necessarily a bad idea to swap *even when you have enough memory*. Remember, that extra memory can be used for disk cache, which may have much more of an effect than whether XP is
" If you look at it's memory footprint out of the box it requires just at 128MB after boot. As soon as you try to use it it's swapping."
I have never used XP on a 128MB system, but if you turn off the snazzy new features (new visual style, fade effect, system restore) it's pretty much the same as Windows 2000. At my school, we run Windows 2000 on 128M PII 233 systems. It's pretty nippy for running Office and Internet Explorer.
The big thing about Windows is that it simply *feels* faster. Compared to OS X, Linux, or practically any other OS, windows is just "snappier". This is for two reasons:
1: Windows doesn't double-buffer the GUI. As things are drawn, they go directly to the screen, with no buffer inbetween. The downside of this is that you see all kinds of visual "glitches" (tearing of windows, white rectangles in the underlying apps). The upside is that this makes the GDI much faster.
2: Windows has proper hardware 2D acceleration on nearly every card. X.org doesn't. While many cards are accelerated under X, the performance is still below Windows. Windows uses the hardware bit-blitting and other effects to greatly speed up the UI.
Nice theory, but it's wrong. I have Word preloading disabled and it still loads in 1-2 seconds on my PC (Athlon XP 2600+, 1GB DDR, Seagate 7200.7).
After using msconfig to disable the startup crap (yes, some Windows programs do load themselves into memory on startup), my system boots and stops "thrashing" in around 35 seconds.
And, believe it or not, when you launch Internet Explorer it *does* start a new process.
They are on my machine. I'm running Windows XP SP2, and not a single one of those flaws work in my copy of IE.
XP SP2 is a whole different ballgame. Apparently, large parts of IE were rewritten to prevent such flaws from existing in the first place. Not to mention that every important OS component was recompiled with a new compiler which is designed to eliminate most buffer overrun possibilities. Not to mention the new firewall and a whole lot more.
For example, when you download a file, IE warns you when you start the download if it could pose a threat. Then, when you open the file for the first time (later on), Windows Explorer warns you that the file was from an unsafe source.
Windows now continually bugs you if you leave automatic updating or the firewall off, or if you don't have antivirus software installed (or if its reference file is not up to date).
The new firewall is on by default. All ports are blocked out of the box. File sharing is off by default.
Everyone wonders why Longhorn has been delayed. The reason is simple: Microsoft rolled most of the new security features in Longhorn into XP SP2. They are releasing what amounts to an entire new OS and they aren't even trying to charge for it.
Microsoft is taking security seriously. Remember when every Linux user laughed at the instability of Windows? It's time that the Linux community realizes that Microsoft isn't standing still. In a few years, they may very well have the most secure mainstream operating system. Microsoft knows that it cannot continue producing insecure software, just as they knew that the could not contiune producing unstable software.
Re:Message from the Extreme Conclusions Club
on
RIP G4 PowerMac
·
· Score: 2, Funny
"Holy shit! I had no idea that OS 9 machines are going to stop working! When is this supposed to happen? What, is there like a big switch in Cupertino or something, and Steve's gonna up and pull it one day?
Idiot."
No, actually he's right on target.
Apple is no longer producing systems. What happens when the mobo fries on one of the old PowerMacs? What happens when you need to buy more computers?
That's one of the reasons many businesses are reluctant to choose Apple. They don't want to be at the whim of Jobs for hardware support.
Can you still run Windows 98 on a brand-new Dell? Absolutely.
Can you run Mac OS 9 on a brand new G5? iBook? PowerBook? Not anymore.
Can you dual-boot into Windows 98 for that legacy application that doesn't support Windows XP? Absolutely.
Can you dual-boot into Mac OS 9 for that legacy application that Classic won't run? Not on any Mac that Apple sells.
"Nine fans and 21 sensors, generating half as many decibels. Now I'm not an Apple fan-boy but that's the level of attention to detail that seperates Apple from Dell, etc."
No, it doesn't.
I am installing computers for my local school district. We are installing about 1800 HP D530 SFF systems. They use a total of three fans, have no "thermal zones", and are nearly silent (the loudest component is the 5400rpm HDD).
The fact is, Apple's system is *overkill*. A system with a ducted thermally-controlled fan can perform similarly in both cooling power and noise to the G5.
The new water-cooling system is even more overkill. A single P4 Prescott runs over 100W. I highly doubt that the combined output of a dual 2.5GHz G5 system is any higher.
It is more than possible to develop a system which uses few fans, cools well, and is quiet. Apple's solution of "thermal chambers" and 9 fans is innovative, but it is absolutely overkill.
"Umm...right. Would you remind repeating that to the family of the woman killed by the Great White not 5 miles from where I live? Giant myth my ass. Some things have been exaggerated, yes, but understating the danger can be just as bad, for both humans and sharks."
It's a giant myth because, of the millions of people who could potentially interact with Sharks each year, there are few reported incidents (55 in 2003).
You could make the statement:
"Umm...right. Would you remind repeating that to the family of the woman killed by TWA 800 5 miles from where I live? Giant myth my ass. Some things have been exaggerated, yes, but understating the danger can be just as bad."
The fact that you know someone who has died in an air crash *does not* make air travel unsafe. The fact is, there really isn't any risk to understimate. The risk is, quite frankly, statistically insignifigant. That's like saying that you should "consider the risk" before eating food because people die from foodborne illness each year (9,000 in the USA alone - 180 times greater than Shark-related deaths).
We can make a sob story out of anything, but the fact is that the only way to assess the risk of an activity is to look at statistics. The statistics say that the danger is minimal. There's nothing to understimate because there is virtually no danger whatsoever.
Somehow, compared to the 32,480 deaths in MVAs (car/SUV/truck crashes), 55 shark attacks just doesn't seem very significant (source).
The fact is, compared to the driving we do every day, Sharks aren't particularly dangerous.
"for oen thing they handle file premissions a lot better and more securly"
In your words, "Rong"!!!!
Windows has a very sophisticated and powerful file permission system which is far more capable and secure than the Unix way of handling things. Once you've seen the way that Windows handles permissions (Inheretence, Deny/Allow/Not Allow, and about 20 permissions per file), "chmod 777" just seems primative.
Moreover, to my knowledge, there has never been a Windows security hole involving the circumvention of file permissions.
"Most importantly though, primarily where linux is concerned, there are constantly people updating and improving the linux kernel."
Right, and, of course, Microsoft's 2000+ paid Windows programmers never touch the kernel. Right.
"Open source finds bugs faster (or so time seems to be telling us)."
There is no conclusive evidence that this is the case. Most Windows exploits are released *after* the bug is patched by Microsoft.
"Therefore most viruses are constructed for Windows and most computer illiterate users (many of whom don't even know what spyware or the like is) use it too."
You hit the nail on the head.
There are four things that make Windows insecure today:
1: Users do not patch their systems. Remember, patching is an important part of *any* OS. Just like the OpenSSH exploit, Windows has security flaws. While it is impossible to quantify the number of veulnerabilities that have yet to be discovered in Windows or Linux, it is clear that such veulnerabilities exist and will always exist. Not patching a Linux system is as dangerous as not patching a Windows system.
2: Users are always running as "Administrator". The stupidity of Windows-based installers and the lack of an easy-to-use privelage elevation system (ala YaST or Mac OS X) contributes to the inability for the typical user to run as a non-root user.
3: Internet Explorer allows code to be installed at the click of a dialog button. Users often click "yes" because they do not know better or because they make a mistake. Moreover, there are some exploits in IE which allow arbitrary code to be executed. Windows XP SP2 rectifies (all current) flaws and is designed to prevent future flaws (the "security zone" system has been rewritten). SP2 also makes it more difficult to install ActiveX controls by mistake.
4: Users download and execute arbitrary code. There is lots of crapware for Windows, and much of it is bundled with software. Remember, if a user downloads and executes arbitrary code, all bets are off. This code can delete critical data and otherwise affect the system. Although non-root users are still veulnerable, the veulnerability is reduced by running as a nonprivelaged user.
"On Windows, if I want to eject my iPod or my camera, I have to click unplug device. Then I have to click the device i want to unplug. Then I have to select the device. Then it tells me I'll also be turning off the filesystem on the drive (duh). Then is asks if I'm sure. Then it tells me it ejected okay."
Since Windows XP, most flash devices are mounted in a mode where they can just be unplugged. I can unplug my camera in Windows without doing *either* of the above.
That's what Microsoft is aiming for. Don't worry, just unplug it.
"Given that, unlike AMD processors, Intel CPUs have a thermal regulator in them, I dont get the joke. I've seen Athlon chips barf their guts out across a motherboard when the heatsink fell off (plastic clip broke off in a tower), but a Celeron should just crash in that case or a P4 will just reduce its clock speed. In fact even the newer 64 bit AMD chips lack a thermal cut out on the chip, but at least (at LONG last) they have it on the motherboard."
Sorry, you're wrong.
All AMD CPUs since the Palomino (Athlon XP) have had a thermal diode *embedded in the CPU*. This includes the Athlon 64.
Early Athlon XP boards lacked the functionality to cut power.
"I just wish that AMD would spend more time on things like this and clock locking rather then pushing for higher speeds."
Why? ALL modern AMD boards have the proper functionality and will shut down when the thermal solution fails. Why should they focus on fixing something which hasn't been broken since 2002?
"Well, system halting is good, but or produce error noice? If the heatsink has fallen completely off you've hardly started to hear that error beep when the CPU core has already permanently damaged.
It'd be really interesting to know, what option applies in which case."
I improperly installed the CPU cooler in a Shuttle SFF Athlon system (with an NForce2 chipset), and it refused to boot and blinked the "CPU" LED on the motherboard. No damage was done to the CPU, after removing the (defective) shim the CPU worked fine.
The whole "thermal death" issue was really a farse. Since Athlon XP, there has been a thermal diode in the CPU. Implementing the $.25 circuit which monitors the diode and cuts the power was left to the motherboard manufacturer. Unfortunately, most manufacturers left the circuit off to save money. Fortunately, every modern board has thermal protection.
Not to mention the fact that, with a properly installed heatsink (remember, 95% of the people with Athlon systems got them professionally assembled and tested by an OEM), the Athlon should *never* have such a problem. Trust me, it takes a lot more than a sudden shock to unseat the heatsink.
"an "Open Source" license, which is just another name for Communism"
Damn! I knew that those Linux geeks must be Communist! Burn them!!!
"Consider the name of the company and its logo: an apple with a bite taken out of it. This is clearly a reference to the Fall, when Adam and Eve were tempted with an apple3 by the serpent."
" to open up certain locked files one has to run a program much like the DOS prompt in Microsoft Windows and type in a secret code: "chmod 666""
Damn! I knew that chmod 666 must be a secret code!
"Apple has just announced the "eMac", a Macintosh computer designed specifically to smuggle Darwinism into our schools"
If they are joking, then it's damn funny. If they aren't, then I'm really disturbed. Because we all know those godless darwinist open-source communists are inserting satanic commands like "chmod 666" into their oeprating system.
These people are dangerous. Remember, Mac OS X is used mostly by the "Athiest" and "Pegan" "computer elete". Remember, it was named "darwin" as a subliminal messege. It's those damned "long haired hippies" at it again.
- The GBA is $99. It has a large screen, game-optimized platform (sprite processing, etc.), and good battery life. - A good mobile phone (Nokia 3660 - Series 60) runs that much, but you have to sign up for a year of wireless service. - There's no standardized platform. Different CPU speeds, different resolutions, different controls. - There's no easy, standard way to get a lot of data quickly. A GBA cart can hold 256Mb (32MB). Try downloading *that* over GPRS. - Many phones are seriously short on memory. - Many phones are slow. - Many phones don't have stereo sound. - Most phones have an (evil) portrait LCD orientation. - The GBA has tons of great games.
It's not the carriers. I can walk into the T-Mobile store and buy a 3660 right now for $99. It is a Series 60 phone with lots of memory, a big screen, a fast processor and an SD card slot.
It's the games, stupid! You can't get Mario Kart for a mobile phone. Nor can you pick up the excellent "Kirby's Block Ball" for $5 at the local used games store.
"Mobile gaming is stalled in the US where mobile infrastructure is fragmented and poor."
Fragmented and poor?
That fragmentation is *why* we have CDMA, the technology on which all current 3G technology is based.
That fragmentation is *why* the US has *two* excellent CDMA2000 networks, both with 3G data.
That fragmentation is *why* the US has two national GSM networks, one with EDGE capabilities, and one with *unlimited* GPRS for $20 a month.
If the US cellular infastructure is so poor, then why can I get 1xRTT everywhere in my state (I live in Colorado and have *never* been without signal)?
We have the same GSM that everyone else does.
The European governments *mandated* GSM. That's why they have one technology. But GSM is *not* the right technology for the US. We have far too many locations where there are few people in a lot of space. GSM has a hard cell size limit that is pretty small (~32km). CDMA can handle much larger cells with far more users with fewer towers. That's why Verizon (CDMA2000) has the best coverage - the GSM carriers don't even come close (not that GSM is bad, but don't try going up in Wyoming with a GSM phone).
If our infastructure is so "poor", then why does 50% of the nation have wireless service?
"why isn't there a system call to exec a file?"
There is.
In fact, Microsoft made it so that a single file could have multiple "verbs". The default verb (usually "open") is executed when the file is double-clicked. In the context menu, alternate verbs such as "print" (for a document) or "copy to CD" (for an MP3) are displayed.
Sidenote:
The Mac OS "Dock" runs contrary to #2. That's why it sucks. If you have five finder windows, you have to CTRL+Click on the Finder and choose the folder. The Taskbar lists all of the folders with their names.
Windows has been moving towards a "document-centric" UI for years. The idea is that you don't "open" a document in Word, you just "open" the document. That's why IE is integrated into the shell, and that's why it doesn't have tabs. The items on your Taskbar aren't applications, they are documents and web pages.
Now, Windows has a long way to go in this regard. But it is getting better.
Slashdot Mirror
"For instance, you might write a multi-cpu aware game by doing the physics in one thread and the graphics in a second thread."
Actually, most games are already written like this, but they are not multithreaded. Most games rely heavily on the GPU for - well - graphical processing. More and more of the work has been offloaded to the GPU in recent years. The CPU is for physics and other game functionality.
"Muslim moderates aren't obligated to feel outrage over the extremists, especially not for your benefit."
Right, just like I'm not obligated to feel outrage over the prisoner abuse in Iraq.
Except that I do. Beacause I'm a person who wants to stand by my principles and who opposes torture, even if it is done by US soldiers.
Sorry, but if moderate Muslims are against terrorism, then why *aren't* they outraged. If you aren't outraged, then you are essentially condoning the terrorism.
I don't believe in a black-and-white world. It is perfectly acceptable for others to hate the United States. We have done a lot of things that are not acceptable. I am outraged at what we are doing right now.
But terrorism is unacceptable. Just is it's not OK for the Isrelis to bomb apartments, it's not acceptable for Palestinains to bomb Isreli restaurants. It's not OK for you to kill another human except in extremely limited circumstances (and, yes, I am against capital punishment).
If you cannot take a stand against torture and murder, then what do you stand for? If you cannot feel outraged that your people are killing innocent people, if you cannot feel outraged at the decapitation of an American soldier, then what do you stand for?
Muslim moderates *ARE* obligated to take a stand against extremism. It is *NOT* acceptable to stand quietly while such unacceptable acts are commited. Just as I am obligated to take a stand against the actions of US soldiers (and to take a stand against US policy), Muslims are obligated to take a stand against murder.
Unless, of course, they believe it is acceptable.
Sidenote:
I agree that Christians aren't exactly clean either. Religous extremeists are dangerous whatever their belif system is. Conservative Christians scare me as well - I, for one, believe that religion and politics should stay distinctly seperate.
"What happens when you need to buy more computers?
I've got a G4 I'll swap for a G5, runs OS 9 beautifully.
I've also got an OS 9 capable iBook I'll gladly swap for a new PowerBook.
Let me know if you're serious and not just blowing hot air."
Right, because "swapping" computers is an acceptable option in a corporate environment.
There are reasons why corporations don't just "load Debian" or "buy hardware on eBay" or "swap hardware" with employees. Corporations need stable, supported hardware that will run their legacy applications. What if the system they get in the swap breaks the next day? What if it's stolen property?
Slashdot doesn't get this, but what's acceptable to an individual *does not fly* in a corporate environment. Corporations can't just buy 500 notebooks on eBay to equip new workers.
HP, for example, can deliver hardware that's tested, warranteed, supported, and, most important, homogenous. When a school system buys 2000 new PCs to run Windows 2000 (which predates OS X), they know that every PC will be the same, every PC will be working out of the box (or will be replaced quickly), and that every PC will be supported in two years. They also know that any applications they buy will still work in five years. More importantly, they know that they will still be able to run Windows 2000. The same district has about 3,000 pre-OSX macs. They are being phased out because it simply costs too much to retrain all of the teachers to use OS X, and because it's impossible to buy pre-OSX Macs anymore (the district never purchased G4s because of cost, so it has been impossible to buy a non-OSX mac since the iMac was phased out - they don't buy notebooks either).
The HP computers ship with Windows XP. The district installs Windows 2000 instead. Why? Becuase Windows 2000 is stable and supported. There is no need to change infastructure, no need to retrain teachers, and no need to support two platforms. PCs give them that option.
Next year, the entire district will run XP (the site license gives them the right to run either XP or 2000). The upgrade will be massive, but it won't fundamentally change the system. XP works fine with the old Windows 2000 servers. 2000 works fine with the new Windows 2003 servers. The classic UI replicates Windows 2000 perfectly. Most teachers won't even notice the change. XP is that compatible. OS X is not. OS X requires new training, new applications (unless you want to use Classic, which isn't exactly a great solution), new servers, and new machines. It would be impossible for a 100% OS 8/9 district to become a 100% OS X district. The all-in-one (and beige) G3s simply do not work correctly on OS X. The PII 233s work fine under Windows XP.
"Will there necessarily be driver support for anything in your new Dell configuration under Windows 98?
e r_ results.asp?strOSs=18&strTypes=DRV%2CARC&ProductID =865&OSFullName=Windows*+98+SE&submit=Go%2 1
Very possibly not.
Hell, I remember when I tried to take a Gateway laptop back from Windows Me to Windows 98 - total disaster. There was no display driver in existence for it under 98."
If you Dell has an Intel chipset (like every single Dell produced), then, yes, you will be able to find drivers for Windows 98.
If your system has a VIA, NVIDIA, Intel, or ATI chipset, and an Intel, VIA (S3), NVIDIA, or ATI graphics adaptor, you will have no problems finding drivers for your system.
"Hell, I remember when I tried to take a Gateway laptop back from Windows Me to Windows 98 - total disaster. There was no display driver in existence for it under 98."
If your Gateway had an Intel chipset (and integrated graphics), as most notebooks do, then you should have no problem finding drivers on the Intel website.
Here's a driver for the Intel 845/865/875 video chipset (for Windows 98):
http://downloadfinder.intel.com/scripts-df/filt
"I guess he means when the "motherboard fries". Still, if your Mac's still under warrenty, of course Apple would replace it. If it's not, that's your problem. It wouldn't be any different with a PC."
Except that you could buy a new PC that's 100% compatible with your old system.
You can't do that with a Mac.
I frankly find this puzzling. T-Mobile has simply provided the best customer service I have *ever* experienced with a service provider.
Hold times are short (under 5 minutes), the CSRs are pretty competent (and they transfer you to level 2 when they know they are out of their league), and the staff is always polite.
Frankly, Comcast isn't bad either. Neither is DirecTV. I don't see what everyone is complaining about (except with Qwest - they put you on hold for an hour and then explain that their DSL network is down and will be down for the next two days).
The problem is that people expect too much. You can't expect level 1 CSRs to be able to fix every problem.
Here are my "rules":
- Act dumb, but not too dumb. If your GPRS WAP service is out, say that you can't connect to [[branded GPRS service name]] and read off the error messege. Let them run through their script and transfer you to someone who can help.
- Be polite. You get excellent results if you say "Thank You" and use a polite tone of voice. Remember, it's not the CSRs fault that your service sucks.
- Don't expect too much. You shouldn't expect a CSR to give you six months of free service because your coverage sucks. Nor should you expect to have your contract revoked.
- Play CSR Russian Roulette. If you don't get what you want, call back. You'll get a new CSR and can try your routine again. This works particularly well for scoring discounted (or free) service when you have network outage issues.
And finally, some tips about wireless:
- Don't expect too much. Your phone, particularly if it's in the PCS spectrum (most GSM, Sprint) will have trouble inside buildings, paritcularly if they are metal. Your best bets for coverage inside are Verizon or Nextel (800mhz, penetrates walls better).
- Don't buy GSM (in the US) unless you know what you are doing. I love my T-Mobile service, but it is not something that I would rely on. GSM networks in the US simply do not provide the quality of service and coverage of CDMA-based networks. You can get good deals with GSM (particularly with T-Mobile - $20 unlimited GPRS; $50 2-phone plan with plenty of minutes), but you must understand that you will not always have service, particularly indoors or in rural areas.
- Stay away from AT&T. Their GSM network is, quite frankly, crap. Not that T-Mobile's is much better, but at least T-Mobile has cheap data. AT&T's customer service is also awful.
- Stay away from Sprint. Verizon CDMA isn't any more expensive and it is far more reliable and comprehensive.
- Go Verizon if you need dependable service. Verizon's CDMA is simply unmatched in terms of reliability and coverage. I had Verizon (CDMA2000, not AMPS) service in Yellowstone National Park.
- Get a good phone. Do research. A good phone makes all the difference. T-Mobile is actually pretty decent with a 1.2W Nokia phone (Nokia 3590). With the 600mW T300 (or the Sidekick with the crappy radio chipset) it is practically useless.
- Test out your service during the free trial. T-Mobile, for example, gives you 14 days to opt-out of the contract. They are throwing you a bone here - you have the perfect chance to see whether their service is acceptable. Go to the tough locations; everywhere you would use your phone on a regular basis, call 611, and keep going through the phone tree (for T-Mobile, you can hit # every 30 or so seconds and it will read you your minute usage indefinately). Listen, walk around, and check to see if the audio quality is acceptable (or if the call drops). You don't have to pay for the minutes.
"You "could" run XP comfortably on a 400MHz K6-2 w/ 128MB RAM or you DO run it comfortably? If you are running XP comfortately on that hardware, you simply aren't running XP. It just isn't possible without serious tweaking. XP alone needs about 128MB of RAM BEFORE you run any apps."
Baloney. I have XP Pro here, and it is using a total of 102MB of memory for the kernel plus all processes (including explorer.exe). Moreover, *half* of that is paged. Remember, no apps are running and there is plenty of memory. The system is running fine but is only using around 50MB of nonpaged memory.
I have XP Professional here on a system with 1GB of memory.
Nope, sorry.
Serious tweaking means turning off unnecessary services and effects, essentially making XP into Windows 2000.
I was helping out a lady in Circuit City to choose a computer. We found an excellent Compaq (2.5GHz Celeron, 40GB drive - fine for her basic needs). However, the Compaq had 128M of DDR. I was trying to show her how slow it would be without more memory, but I couldn't do it. IE, Windows Media Player, Microsoft Works - they all loaded pretty quickly and ran well.
Now, I told her to get the memory anyway. Once that thing gets Norton and other memory-chugging programs on it, she'll be happy that she has the memory. But it ran fine with only 128M.
Try it sometime:
1: Disable visual styles.
2: Disable system restore.
3: Run "msconfig". Disable all startup apps (not services, but the apps that run when you log in and usually appear in the system tray).
4: Run a virus and spyware scan to ensure that your system is clean.
5: Remove all but 128M of memory in your system.
Remember, XP is *agressive* about swap.
** XP swaps even when it has plenty of free memory **
This is not a bad thing. Paging out unused code (like the print spooling service) allows the system to allocate more memory for disk cache. When I need that service, it can be paged back in - it only takes a second.
So, when you say that the system is using 128MB of memory, you're right (mostly - it's closer to 100M in reality). But most of that memory is paged, so there is plenty of leftover memory to run applications.
I have run Windows 2000 on a system with 64MB of memory. It's not exactly fun, but it runs well enough to do a PowerPoint presentation and surf the web.
"EXCUSE ME? XP starts swapping as soon as you start ANYTHING. If you look at it's memory footprint out of the box it requires just at 128MB after boot. As soon as you try to use it it's swapping.
XP is comfortable at 256Mb and above."
That's INTENTIONAL. XP is extremely agressive about swapping. That's because it's not necessarily a bad idea to swap *even when you have enough memory*. Remember, that extra memory can be used for disk cache, which may have much more of an effect than whether XP is
" If you look at it's memory footprint out of the box it requires just at 128MB after boot. As soon as you try to use it it's swapping."
I have never used XP on a 128MB system, but if you turn off the snazzy new features (new visual style, fade effect, system restore) it's pretty much the same as Windows 2000. At my school, we run Windows 2000 on 128M PII 233 systems. It's pretty nippy for running Office and Internet Explorer.
The big thing about Windows is that it simply *feels* faster. Compared to OS X, Linux, or practically any other OS, windows is just "snappier". This is for two reasons:
1: Windows doesn't double-buffer the GUI. As things are drawn, they go directly to the screen, with no buffer inbetween. The downside of this is that you see all kinds of visual "glitches" (tearing of windows, white rectangles in the underlying apps). The upside is that this makes the GDI much faster.
2: Windows has proper hardware 2D acceleration on nearly every card. X.org doesn't. While many cards are accelerated under X, the performance is still below Windows. Windows uses the hardware bit-blitting and other effects to greatly speed up the UI.
Nice theory, but it's wrong. I have Word preloading disabled and it still loads in 1-2 seconds on my PC (Athlon XP 2600+, 1GB DDR, Seagate 7200.7).
After using msconfig to disable the startup crap (yes, some Windows programs do load themselves into memory on startup), my system boots and stops "thrashing" in around 35 seconds.
And, believe it or not, when you launch Internet Explorer it *does* start a new process.
"Why didn't Apple pack these things with some unreleased card from ATI or Nvidia that would run 5X as fast, huh?"
Right, because the GeForce 6800 is completely "unreleased". So "unreleased", in fact, that Newegg.com is selling them right now.
Oh, and the Radeon X800 is "unreleased" as well.
"None of the ones in the IE list are."
They are on my machine. I'm running Windows XP SP2, and not a single one of those flaws work in my copy of IE.
XP SP2 is a whole different ballgame. Apparently, large parts of IE were rewritten to prevent such flaws from existing in the first place. Not to mention that every important OS component was recompiled with a new compiler which is designed to eliminate most buffer overrun possibilities. Not to mention the new firewall and a whole lot more.
For example, when you download a file, IE warns you when you start the download if it could pose a threat. Then, when you open the file for the first time (later on), Windows Explorer warns you that the file was from an unsafe source.
Windows now continually bugs you if you leave automatic updating or the firewall off, or if you don't have antivirus software installed (or if its reference file is not up to date).
The new firewall is on by default. All ports are blocked out of the box. File sharing is off by default.
Everyone wonders why Longhorn has been delayed. The reason is simple: Microsoft rolled most of the new security features in Longhorn into XP SP2. They are releasing what amounts to an entire new OS and they aren't even trying to charge for it.
Microsoft is taking security seriously. Remember when every Linux user laughed at the instability of Windows? It's time that the Linux community realizes that Microsoft isn't standing still. In a few years, they may very well have the most secure mainstream operating system. Microsoft knows that it cannot continue producing insecure software, just as they knew that the could not contiune producing unstable software.
"Holy shit! I had no idea that OS 9 machines are going to stop working! When is this supposed to happen? What, is there like a big switch in Cupertino or something, and Steve's gonna up and pull it one day?
Idiot."
No, actually he's right on target.
Apple is no longer producing systems. What happens when the mobo fries on one of the old PowerMacs? What happens when you need to buy more computers?
That's one of the reasons many businesses are reluctant to choose Apple. They don't want to be at the whim of Jobs for hardware support.
Can you still run Windows 98 on a brand-new Dell? Absolutely.
Can you run Mac OS 9 on a brand new G5? iBook? PowerBook? Not anymore.
Can you dual-boot into Windows 98 for that legacy application that doesn't support Windows XP? Absolutely.
Can you dual-boot into Mac OS 9 for that legacy application that Classic won't run? Not on any Mac that Apple sells.
"Nine fans and 21 sensors, generating half as many decibels. Now I'm not an Apple fan-boy but that's the level of attention to detail that seperates Apple from Dell, etc."
No, it doesn't.
I am installing computers for my local school district. We are installing about 1800 HP D530 SFF systems. They use a total of three fans, have no "thermal zones", and are nearly silent (the loudest component is the 5400rpm HDD).
The fact is, Apple's system is *overkill*. A system with a ducted thermally-controlled fan can perform similarly in both cooling power and noise to the G5.
The new water-cooling system is even more overkill. A single P4 Prescott runs over 100W. I highly doubt that the combined output of a dual 2.5GHz G5 system is any higher.
It is more than possible to develop a system which uses few fans, cools well, and is quiet. Apple's solution of "thermal chambers" and 9 fans is innovative, but it is absolutely overkill.
The HP D530 systems at my school have two fans and no thermal zones, and they are whisper quiet. The loudest component is the 5400rpm HDD.
And they have P4s.
"Umm...right. Would you remind repeating that to the family of the woman killed by the Great White not 5 miles from where I live? Giant myth my ass. Some things have been exaggerated, yes, but understating the danger can be just as bad, for both humans and sharks."
It's a giant myth because, of the millions of people who could potentially interact with Sharks each year, there are few reported incidents (55 in 2003).
You could make the statement:
"Umm...right. Would you remind repeating that to the family of the woman killed by TWA 800 5 miles from where I live? Giant myth my ass. Some things have been exaggerated, yes, but understating the danger can be just as bad."
The fact that you know someone who has died in an air crash *does not* make air travel unsafe. The fact is, there really isn't any risk to understimate. The risk is, quite frankly, statistically insignifigant. That's like saying that you should "consider the risk" before eating food because people die from foodborne illness each year (9,000 in the USA alone - 180 times greater than Shark-related deaths).
We can make a sob story out of anything, but the fact is that the only way to assess the risk of an activity is to look at statistics. The statistics say that the danger is minimal. There's nothing to understimate because there is virtually no danger whatsoever.
Somehow, compared to the 32,480 deaths in MVAs (car/SUV/truck crashes), 55 shark attacks just doesn't seem very significant (source). The fact is, compared to the driving we do every day, Sharks aren't particularly dangerous.
"for oen thing they handle file premissions a lot better and more securly"
In your words, "Rong"!!!!
Windows has a very sophisticated and powerful file permission system which is far more capable and secure than the Unix way of handling things. Once you've seen the way that Windows handles permissions (Inheretence, Deny/Allow/Not Allow, and about 20 permissions per file), "chmod 777" just seems primative.
Moreover, to my knowledge, there has never been a Windows security hole involving the circumvention of file permissions.
"Most importantly though, primarily where linux is concerned, there are constantly people updating and improving the linux kernel."
Right, and, of course, Microsoft's 2000+ paid Windows programmers never touch the kernel. Right.
"Open source finds bugs faster (or so time seems to be telling us)."
There is no conclusive evidence that this is the case. Most Windows exploits are released *after* the bug is patched by Microsoft.
"Therefore most viruses are constructed for Windows and most computer illiterate users (many of whom don't even know what spyware or the like is) use it too."
You hit the nail on the head.
There are four things that make Windows insecure today:
1: Users do not patch their systems. Remember, patching is an important part of *any* OS. Just like the OpenSSH exploit, Windows has security flaws. While it is impossible to quantify the number of veulnerabilities that have yet to be discovered in Windows or Linux, it is clear that such veulnerabilities exist and will always exist. Not patching a Linux system is as dangerous as not patching a Windows system.
2: Users are always running as "Administrator". The stupidity of Windows-based installers and the lack of an easy-to-use privelage elevation system (ala YaST or Mac OS X) contributes to the inability for the typical user to run as a non-root user.
3: Internet Explorer allows code to be installed at the click of a dialog button. Users often click "yes" because they do not know better or because they make a mistake. Moreover, there are some exploits in IE which allow arbitrary code to be executed. Windows XP SP2 rectifies (all current) flaws and is designed to prevent future flaws (the "security zone" system has been rewritten). SP2 also makes it more difficult to install ActiveX controls by mistake.
4: Users download and execute arbitrary code. There is lots of crapware for Windows, and much of it is bundled with software. Remember, if a user downloads and executes arbitrary code, all bets are off. This code can delete critical data and otherwise affect the system. Although non-root users are still veulnerable, the veulnerability is reduced by running as a nonprivelaged user.
"On Windows, if I want to eject my iPod or my camera, I have to click unplug device. Then I have to click the device i want to unplug. Then I have to select the device. Then it tells me I'll also be turning off the filesystem on the drive (duh). Then is asks if I'm sure. Then it tells me it ejected okay."
Since Windows XP, most flash devices are mounted in a mode where they can just be unplugged. I can unplug my camera in Windows without doing *either* of the above.
That's what Microsoft is aiming for. Don't worry, just unplug it.
"Given that, unlike AMD processors, Intel CPUs have a thermal regulator in them, I dont get the joke. I've seen Athlon chips barf their guts out across a motherboard when the heatsink fell off (plastic clip broke off in a tower), but a Celeron should just crash in that case or a P4 will just reduce its clock speed. In fact even the newer 64 bit AMD chips lack a thermal cut out on the chip, but at least (at LONG last) they have it on the motherboard."
Sorry, you're wrong.
All AMD CPUs since the Palomino (Athlon XP) have had a thermal diode *embedded in the CPU*. This includes the Athlon 64.
Early Athlon XP boards lacked the functionality to cut power.
"I just wish that AMD would spend more time on things like this and clock locking rather then pushing for higher speeds."
Why? ALL modern AMD boards have the proper functionality and will shut down when the thermal solution fails. Why should they focus on fixing something which hasn't been broken since 2002?
"Well, system halting is good, but or produce error noice? If the heatsink has fallen completely off you've hardly started to hear that error beep when the CPU core has already permanently damaged.
It'd be really interesting to know, what option applies in which case."
I improperly installed the CPU cooler in a Shuttle SFF Athlon system (with an NForce2 chipset), and it refused to boot and blinked the "CPU" LED on the motherboard. No damage was done to the CPU, after removing the (defective) shim the CPU worked fine.
The whole "thermal death" issue was really a farse. Since Athlon XP, there has been a thermal diode in the CPU. Implementing the $.25 circuit which monitors the diode and cuts the power was left to the motherboard manufacturer. Unfortunately, most manufacturers left the circuit off to save money. Fortunately, every modern board has thermal protection.
Not to mention the fact that, with a properly installed heatsink (remember, 95% of the people with Athlon systems got them professionally assembled and tested by an OEM), the Athlon should *never* have such a problem. Trust me, it takes a lot more than a sudden shock to unseat the heatsink.
My favorite quotes:
"an "Open Source" license, which is just another name for Communism"
Damn! I knew that those Linux geeks must be Communist! Burn them!!!
"Consider the name of the company and its logo: an apple with a bite taken out of it. This is clearly a reference to the Fall, when Adam and Eve were tempted with an apple3 by the serpent."
" to open up certain locked files one has to run a program much like the DOS prompt in Microsoft Windows and type in a secret code: "chmod 666""
Damn! I knew that chmod 666 must be a secret code!
"Apple has just announced the "eMac", a Macintosh computer designed specifically to smuggle Darwinism into our schools"
If they are joking, then it's damn funny. If they aren't, then I'm really disturbed. Because we all know those godless darwinist open-source communists are inserting satanic commands like "chmod 666" into their oeprating system.
These people are dangerous. Remember, Mac OS X is used mostly by the "Athiest" and "Pegan" "computer elete". Remember, it was named "darwin" as a subliminal messege. It's those damned "long haired hippies" at it again.
These people need to lay off the LSD.
- The GBA is $99. It has a large screen, game-optimized platform (sprite processing, etc.), and good battery life.
- A good mobile phone (Nokia 3660 - Series 60) runs that much, but you have to sign up for a year of wireless service.
- There's no standardized platform. Different CPU speeds, different resolutions, different controls.
- There's no easy, standard way to get a lot of data quickly. A GBA cart can hold 256Mb (32MB). Try downloading *that* over GPRS.
- Many phones are seriously short on memory.
- Many phones are slow.
- Many phones don't have stereo sound.
- Most phones have an (evil) portrait LCD orientation.
- The GBA has tons of great games.
It's not the carriers. I can walk into the T-Mobile store and buy a 3660 right now for $99. It is a Series 60 phone with lots of memory, a big screen, a fast processor and an SD card slot.
It's the games, stupid! You can't get Mario Kart for a mobile phone. Nor can you pick up the excellent "Kirby's Block Ball" for $5 at the local used games store.
"Mobile gaming is stalled in the US where mobile infrastructure is fragmented and poor."
Fragmented and poor?
That fragmentation is *why* we have CDMA, the technology on which all current 3G technology is based.
That fragmentation is *why* the US has *two* excellent CDMA2000 networks, both with 3G data.
That fragmentation is *why* the US has two national GSM networks, one with EDGE capabilities, and one with *unlimited* GPRS for $20 a month.
If the US cellular infastructure is so poor, then why can I get 1xRTT everywhere in my state (I live in Colorado and have *never* been without signal)?
We have the same GSM that everyone else does.
The European governments *mandated* GSM. That's why they have one technology. But GSM is *not* the right technology for the US. We have far too many locations where there are few people in a lot of space. GSM has a hard cell size limit that is pretty small (~32km). CDMA can handle much larger cells with far more users with fewer towers. That's why Verizon (CDMA2000) has the best coverage - the GSM carriers don't even come close (not that GSM is bad, but don't try going up in Wyoming with a GSM phone).
If our infastructure is so "poor", then why does 50% of the nation have wireless service?
"why isn't there a system call to exec a file?" There is. In fact, Microsoft made it so that a single file could have multiple "verbs". The default verb (usually "open") is executed when the file is double-clicked. In the context menu, alternate verbs such as "print" (for a document) or "copy to CD" (for an MP3) are displayed. Sidenote: The Mac OS "Dock" runs contrary to #2. That's why it sucks. If you have five finder windows, you have to CTRL+Click on the Finder and choose the folder. The Taskbar lists all of the folders with their names. Windows has been moving towards a "document-centric" UI for years. The idea is that you don't "open" a document in Word, you just "open" the document. That's why IE is integrated into the shell, and that's why it doesn't have tabs. The items on your Taskbar aren't applications, they are documents and web pages. Now, Windows has a long way to go in this regard. But it is getting better.
Right, because the extra 200mw those LEDs use is really going to destroy the environment.
Come on. The CPU draws 30+ times as much power as those blue LEDs.