"UK plugs all have fuses and and are keyed so you can only stick it in one way around (i dont know why thats needed on an AC system but hey) and also the earth pole (which is always there) is a little bit longer so it makes contact before the live poles do."
The three-pronged Edison plug we use in the US is similar. The plug is polarized (one blade is longer than the other) and the ground is longer than the other two prongs.
Plugs can be two or three prongs, polarized or not. Most "wall wart" transformers are not polarized, which is convenient because you can plug them into either plug in the socket without blocking the other socket.
Not every plug is fused, but usually there are only a few sockets on a circuit (and the sockets are rated for higher current draw than the breaker - so the breaker will trip before the blug goes). Circuits are usually 15A or 20A; plugs which require 20A have one pin turned sideways so they only fit in a 20A socket.
GFCIs are required in wet areas (bathrooms, kitchens). They automatically stop the current flow if a ground fault occurs (e.g. someone drops a hair dryer into the tub). Some homes (such as my own) have GFCIs everywhere.
Higher-powered devices (ovens, electric driers) are 230V, 30A. That's 6.9KW of power, plenty for most applications.
"Adding sshd to windows would be rather useless since almost nothing can be done via the command line on windows."
You might want to check on that one:
"The Windows Server 2003 family provides a significantly enhanced command-line infrastructure, letting administrators perform most management tasks without using a graphical user interface. Of special importance is the ability to perform a wide range of tasks by accessing the information store enabled by Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI). This WMI command-line (WMIC) feature provides a simple command-line interface that interoperates with existing shells and utility commands and can be easily extended by scripts or other administration-oriented applications.
Overall, the greater command-line functionality in the Windows Server 2003 family, combined with ready-to-use scripts, rivals the power of other operating systems often associated with higher cost of ownership. Administrators accustomed to using the command line to manage UNIX or Linux systems can continue managing from the command line in the Windows Server 2003 family."
The Prius does not 'start from cold'. It has a 3-liter vacuum flask (thermos bottle) which stores hot coolant to warm up the motor before it starts.
It only 'cold starts' when it has been off for several hours.
The Prius keeps the catalytic converter warm at all cost. It will sometimes even sacrifice fuel emissions to do this. That's why it's an AT-PZEV vehicle.
Moreover, what do you think you're doing in a regular car in a traffic jam? Lots of idling. Starting the engine for ten minutes every thirty (the Prius can go a half mile before recharging) is better than leaving it running the whole time.
You don't think that the world's largest software company will ever release a new version of their most profitable product?
"And, of course, we all know that Apple will make absolutely no improvements from now until 2006 when Longhorn ships."
Of course they will. But from what I've seen of Longhorn, it is a fundamental step forward in the way people interact with their computers. There have been very few fundamental UI changes to OS X since its release. Refinements, polish, new features - yes. OS X is a very nice OS, and it will be more so by the time that Longhorn is released. But in 2006, OS X will still be OS X. Longhorn is something totally different from XP. It is a different kind of operating system. That's what people don't get.
"unlike a certain modern american figher aircraft (F22), the Eurofighter is actualy being built and is not about to get axed any time soon."
"The first test flight of the Raptor occurred on September 7, 1997. The first production F/A-22 was delivered to the Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, on January 14, 2003."
So, it appears that the F-22 has been in production for over a year.
Moreover, Britin's DERA conducted a study using simulators which found the F/A-22 Raptor to be twice as effective at shooting down Sukhoi Su-35's as the Typhoon.
"The first test flight of the Raptor occurred on September 7, 1997. The first production F/A-22 was delivered to the Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, on January 14, 2003."
"RedHat et. al need to meet release deadlines because they have to shove out "the latest and greatest" to make $$$. Debian has no such problems - that's why Debian Stable puts all other distros to shame when it comes to reliability and stability. It may not have all the whiz-bangs, but it is *_rock solid_*."
RedHat makes no money on Fedora whatsoever. Fedora essentially *is* "RedHat Unstable". RedHat's stable line is their bread-and butter.
"Debian has no such problems - that's why Debian Stable puts all other distros to shame when it comes to reliability and stability."
I have had no problems with Fedora Core 1 with either reliability or stability. My system has been up for months without issue.
"It is rock solid. No holes, no bugs, nothing."
Bullshit. Software *always* has bugs, and it *always* has security holes.
"Debian has a *VERY* firm concept of a release - that is, a Debian relase is *STABLE*."
Translation: Debian doesn't regularly release with fresh packages. Their only releases are filled with stale packages like GNOME 1.4 and KDE 2. Their "testing" release is actually an ongoing release which constantly changes.
Sorry, Debian nuts. Your favorite distro frankly sucks from a business sense.
If you want to run modern packages in a business setting, Debian makes it far more difficult to keep every system in sync. With Fedora, you can run Fedora Core 1 on every system and recieve security updates as they are released - just as you can with Windows. With Debian, you have to run Stable if you want a single set of packages with only security upgrades.
The whole "Stable"/"Unstable"/"Testing" thing runs completely counter to the rest of the industry. Microsoft releases a new OS every few years and then only releases incremental bug-fixes and security upgrades. Thus, when you are running "Windows XP", you are running a specific set of packages with a specific configuration system and specific interface. How is a business supposed to get support for "Debian Unstable"? Are they supposed to thell the support company the versions of every package on their system? What if they want to get security upgrades without signifigantly changing their system?
With Debian, a business would be forced to use Stable if they wanted a stable, supported platform. Unfortunately, stable is filled with old packages. Fedora Core 1 is tested and stable. You can call up LinuxCare (or another corporation), tell them that you are using "Fedora Core 1", and get support for configuration and other issues. You can't do that with Debian Unstable.
"That said, this is why most people in the know *do* run Debian Unstable and apt-get update && upgrade daily, because it is desktop where stability is not as mission critical."
You just admitted that Debian's releases are so old that people "in the know" are using an unstable release. With Fedora, you get a tested, polished release with modern software. There isn't a need to worry about your packages changing (or not working) tomorrow because you ran "apt-get update && upgrade". You can get security patches and still keep everything the way it is.
This is actually not the first PowerPC Mac emulator for x86. SheepShaver has been able to run PowerPC Mac OS (only up to Mac OS 8.6, not OS X) for some time now. It's from the developer of the excellent Basilisk II emulator.
Hopefully, the two projects will collaborate and help improve the performance of the emulator until it is usable. 1/20th of actual CPU speed would be acceptable.
Moreover, the DCE goes far beyond what Quartz extreme does. QE is actually quite primitive - very few operations are GPU accelerated. That's why window resizing is still horribly slow.
SledgeHammer (Opteron) at 130nm with 1024K of L2 Cache is 193mm^2. Newcastle (Athlon 64) with 512K of L2 Cache at 90nm will be far smaller.
Remember that Athlon XP "Thoroughbred-B" has an 80mm^2 die size. That's why my Athlon XP was so cheap. AMD has been shipping a CPU smaller than Pentium-M for over two years.
"Pentium-M"
Banias at 130nm is 100mm^2.
"Also, there's been some reporting on The Inq to the effect of Intel wanting to drive down costs. There's a reason Prescott is dead end."
I agree fully. NetBurst has run out of gas. Comparing clock to increase in benchmarks proves that.
"Yeah, and they sold it to you while losing money because they're such nice guys."
AMD is interested in profit. They are not "nice guys". AMD is *still* selling Athlon XP 2600+ CPUs for $84. And they continue to introduce lower and lower priced Athlon 64s.
"The question is if the market is going to go in the ultra-value direction or not, and if it does, the P-M is probably the best positioned."
Why? Athlon 64 is far better positioned for one big reason: integrated memory controller.
In the untra-low end, reducing the number of traces on the board and the number of chips on the board means reducing costs.
NVIDIA's NForce3 250 is a single-chip northbridge/southbridge. AMD's integrated memory controller eliminates the need for a northbridge. HyperTransport decreases the number of traces between the northbridge (northbridge/southbridge) and the CPU.
Not to mention that AMD could *still* ship Athlon XP to meet the low end. It has die sizes that compare very nicely to Pentium-M.
"Why not $50 computers?"
Because there is no margin. Assume the computer costs nothing to produce (of course, this is impossible). This leaves $50 to test, market, ship, and support the computer. It is doubtful that computer corporations could even make money on such a product.
"Intel is reputed to have the best process technology."
Intel does have the best process technology. AMD is at least six months behind. However, that does not mean that AMD cannot deliver a cost-competitive part.
"The NEW AMD is trying to reposition themselves as a high-end provider"
Want to know why? It's because you can't make any money selling CPUs at $10 a pop (a requirement for your $50 computer). Intel knows this. AMD knows this. Assuming a margin of $5, Intel would have to sell 3 *billion* CPUs to meet 2003 revenues (30 billion, assume 50% from CPUs).
AMD wants to sell higher-end parts because that's how you make profit.
Intel can marginalize the business if they want. Historically, they have avoided doing this because it would send their stock through the floor (imagine a 30% dip in revenue in one year). They aren't stupid.
"Open source developers are not your employee/slave, they will do whatever the hell they want and, as a user, you should just feel fortunate that your needs were similar to the coder's."
WRONG attitude, man. Open-source devlopers *should* be concerned about the needs of their users.
Linux will NEVER take off with this attitude.
THE NEEDS OF NORMAL PEOPLE DO NOT SQUARE WITH THE NEEDS OF THE DEVELOPERS. IF OPEN SOURCE DEVELOPERS DO NOT DEVELOP SOFTWARE THAT REFLECTS THE NEEDS OF NORMAL PEOPLE, THAN NORMAL PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR SOFTWARE THAT DOES.
USERS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO ALIGN THEIR NEEDS TO THE NEEDS OF THE CODERS. OPEN SOURCE DEVELOPERS SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON THE NEEDS OF THEIR USERS, AND IF THEY EVER HOPE FOR THOSE USERS TO BE NORMAL PEOPLE, THEY HAD BETTER FOCUS ON THE NEEDS OF NORMAL PEOPLE.
That feels much better.
This attitude of "fix it yourself" or "I don't need that so why whould anyone" is idiodic. We all preach that we want the world to use Linux and open source solutions. Yet, if we do not build software that reflects their needs, why should they use open-soruce software?
"Every newbie who wants to have a longterm relationship with open source must come to terms with this."
No, they don't. The GNOME project understands that it doesn't have to be that way. That's why lots of Slashdot users *hate* what is happening with GNOME. GNOME is attempting to be a desktop for normal people. It is not designed for Linux hackers. GNOME doesn't reflect the needs of the coders, it reflects the needs of the users.
Your attitude is elitist. This "newbie" is the child yelling that the Emperor has no clothes. You are too concieted to realize that open-source software *can* and *must* reflect the needs of the user if it ever wants to be accepted.
"XP Reloaded" as it is internall codenamed is simply XP SP2 plus a new version of Windows Media Player.
It will be free to all current XP users.
"XP Reloaded" is not really a new product at all. It is simply a "refresh" of XP that includes all of the features available for free to XP customers (.NET, Windows Movie Maker, SP2) plus a new version of Meida Player.
"Intel can make Pentiums cheaper than AMD can make K8s"
That's a big assumption. AMD has always tried to keep a per-die cost lead on Intel. They do this by keeping their die-size down so that they achieve higher yields. That's why most of AMD's future low-end Athlon 64s have 1/2 as much L2 cache as the Pentium-M or P4 Prescott.
"If Intel drive the cost of PCs down a couple hundred bucks, AMD will be marooned in the high end workstation market"
Huh? If the costs of PCs decreases by a couple of hundred bucks, they will be free.
This makes no sense. AMD has *always* had a price lead in the low end. My Athlon XP 2600+ was $84 and it beats any Intel chip under $150. Moreover, AMD has consistantly pushed the price of Atlon 64 down since introduction. You can now get an Athlon 64 2800+ for around $175.
"The P-M is even cheaper to make than the P4."
Where did you get that fact? Northwood Pentium 4s are certainly cheaper to manufacture than the Pentium-M (die size, mostly). Intel does not disclose their per-die costs and thus it is impossible to determine which is cheaper to manufacture.
"Intel can also demand a much higher profit margin."
Not necessarily. Intel has been forced to drop their margin substantially since AMD introduced the Athlon several years ago. That's why the P4 2.6GHz is only $156.
"be forced to sell at a loss (which they've done before)"
It is not clear if AMD ever sold CPUs at a loss. They have made substantial losses as a corporation in the last few years, but that is likely because of fixed costs like the development of K8 and Fab 30.
Today's mobile GPUs (not the Intel Integrated garbage) can draw just as much wattage as the CPU (a Pentium-M and a Mobility Radeon 9600 are about the same).
Now, as long as you don't play games, the GPU won't draw much current. However, if you're just surfing the web or typing, the CPU isn't drawing much either. In this situation, the screen would likely become the largest power draw.
"Cheap, light, and fast, pick three; I like cheap and light."
OK, then.
Go on eBay. You can get a Compaq Armada M300 (PIII 600, up to 384M of memory) for around $350. It's got a 11.5" XGA screen, it's 3.1lbs (including battery), and very thin and light (magnesium alloy case). It runs Windows XP and Linux fine, has a Cardbus slot for a wifi card, built in 56K and 10/100 ethernet, ATI Rage graphics with 4MB (horrible 3D, but fine for 2D), and a nice keyboard. Not to mention the fact that the power adaptor is tiny, and you can get a nice dock which only increases the thickness to around 1.2" (without changing the size otherwise) and adds a floppy + another drive (DVD-ROM+CD-RW, DVD burner, etc.).
"Users didn't want to put up with logout as user, log in as administrator, install/config, log out as administrator, log in as user. For UNIX, that isn't necessary."
It's not necessary with Windows either. The "run as" command has no problems running installers or other graphical applications.
Heck, I've installed service packs fine using "run as".
Not to mention the fact that you can set Windows Installer to automatically request administrator privelages.
"Java and C# can't touch this, nor was this the purpose for which they were designed."
That isn't necessarily so. Microsoft is attempting to replace the Win32 API with the.NET CLR. The.NET CLR runs a VM-bytecode (similar to Java). Microsoft is pushing it as the future of their operating system.
There is no reason why a JIT-compiled language cannot meet or even exceed the performance of a precompiled language. Although C and C++ may be the languages of choice today, they may not be tomorrow.
Java has already been used to develop the operating system for mobile devices like the Danger Hiptop. It has become the standard for programming on cellular telephones and is uickly gaining support on PDAs. As of yet, Java has had limited success on the desktop, but thanks to faster computers and better runtimes, this may change.
Writing off Java and C# as "passing languages" is a bad idea. Programmers (and users) are beginning to value security and stability above raw performance. The performance of such programs is often "good enough" that it is not an issue for most users.
By your logic, FORTRAN should outlast C. FORTRAN is used extensively by scientific and technical applications because it optimizes better than C (and certainly better than C++).
Slashdot Mirror
"with the internet, which Fox News told me is full of degrading pornography!"
Better call Fox News. They seem to have slipped up and said something true.
DirecTV DVR with TiVo.
Record / Record. That gets Andromeda and Joan of Arcadia. Pull out the rabbit ears (or another DirecTV reciever) and watch Enterprise live.
"UK plugs all have fuses and and are keyed so you can only stick it in one way around (i dont know why thats needed on an AC system but hey) and also the earth pole (which is always there) is a little bit longer so it makes contact before the live poles do."
The three-pronged Edison plug we use in the US is similar. The plug is polarized (one blade is longer than the other) and the ground is longer than the other two prongs.
Plugs can be two or three prongs, polarized or not. Most "wall wart" transformers are not polarized, which is convenient because you can plug them into either plug in the socket without blocking the other socket.
Not every plug is fused, but usually there are only a few sockets on a circuit (and the sockets are rated for higher current draw than the breaker - so the breaker will trip before the blug goes). Circuits are usually 15A or 20A; plugs which require 20A have one pin turned sideways so they only fit in a 20A socket.
GFCIs are required in wet areas (bathrooms, kitchens). They automatically stop the current flow if a ground fault occurs (e.g. someone drops a hair dryer into the tub). Some homes (such as my own) have GFCIs everywhere.
Higher-powered devices (ovens, electric driers) are 230V, 30A. That's 6.9KW of power, plenty for most applications.
"It might be because EUROPE ISN'T ONE FREAKING COUNTRY, LIKE THE US!"
They sure act like it a lot of the time. European citizenship, European laws, European currency.
"Adding sshd to windows would be rather useless since almost nothing can be done via the command line on windows."
You might want to check on that one:
"The Windows Server 2003 family provides a significantly enhanced command-line infrastructure, letting administrators perform most management tasks without using a graphical user interface. Of special importance is the ability to perform a wide range of tasks by accessing the information store enabled by Windows Management Instrumentation (WMI). This WMI command-line (WMIC) feature provides a simple command-line interface that interoperates with existing shells and utility commands and can be easily extended by scripts or other administration-oriented applications.
Overall, the greater command-line functionality in the Windows Server 2003 family, combined with ready-to-use scripts, rivals the power of other operating systems often associated with higher cost of ownership. Administrators accustomed to using the command line to manage UNIX or Linux systems can continue managing from the command line in the Windows Server 2003 family."
The Prius does not 'start from cold'. It has a 3-liter vacuum flask (thermos bottle) which stores hot coolant to warm up the motor before it starts.
It only 'cold starts' when it has been off for several hours.
The Prius keeps the catalytic converter warm at all cost. It will sometimes even sacrifice fuel emissions to do this. That's why it's an AT-PZEV vehicle.
Moreover, what do you think you're doing in a regular car in a traffic jam? Lots of idling. Starting the engine for ten minutes every thirty (the Prius can go a half mile before recharging) is better than leaving it running the whole time.
You don't think that the world's largest software company will ever release a new version of their most profitable product?
"And, of course, we all know that Apple will make absolutely no improvements from now until 2006 when Longhorn ships."
Of course they will. But from what I've seen of Longhorn, it is a fundamental step forward in the way people interact with their computers. There have been very few fundamental UI changes to OS X since its release. Refinements, polish, new features - yes. OS X is a very nice OS, and it will be more so by the time that Longhorn is released. But in 2006, OS X will still be OS X. Longhorn is something totally different from XP. It is a different kind of operating system. That's what people don't get.
"AFAIK, it won't boot anything over OS 8.6."
I would think that that was made clear by the following quote in my post:
"only up to Mac OS 8.6, not OS X"
"As you can probably tell, the Mac emulation scene is pretty much dead."
SheepShaver + This new project would seem to imply that this is not the case.
"While I think that the F22 might reach and possibly go beyond the capabilities of the JAS 39 Gripen"
Yes, particularly because it has been shipping since January 2003.
"unlike a certain modern american figher aircraft (F22), the Eurofighter is actualy being built and is not about to get axed any time soon."
"The first test flight of the Raptor occurred on September 7, 1997. The first production F/A-22 was delivered to the Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, on January 14, 2003."
So, it appears that the F-22 has been in production for over a year.
Moreover, Britin's DERA conducted a study using simulators which found the F/A-22 Raptor to be twice as effective at shooting down Sukhoi Su-35's as the Typhoon.
From Wikipedia:
"The first test flight of the Raptor occurred on September 7, 1997. The first production F/A-22 was delivered to the Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, on January 14, 2003."
No, but Athlon 64 is.
"RedHat et. al need to meet release deadlines because they have to shove out "the latest and greatest" to make $$$. Debian has no such problems - that's why Debian Stable puts all other distros to shame when it comes to reliability and stability. It may not have all the whiz-bangs, but it is *_rock solid_*."
RedHat makes no money on Fedora whatsoever. Fedora essentially *is* "RedHat Unstable". RedHat's stable line is their bread-and butter.
"Debian has no such problems - that's why Debian Stable puts all other distros to shame when it comes to reliability and stability."
I have had no problems with Fedora Core 1 with either reliability or stability. My system has been up for months without issue.
"It is rock solid. No holes, no bugs, nothing."
Bullshit. Software *always* has bugs, and it *always* has security holes.
"Debian has a *VERY* firm concept of a release - that is, a Debian relase is *STABLE*."
Translation: Debian doesn't regularly release with fresh packages. Their only releases are filled with stale packages like GNOME 1.4 and KDE 2. Their "testing" release is actually an ongoing release which constantly changes.
Sorry, Debian nuts. Your favorite distro frankly sucks from a business sense.
If you want to run modern packages in a business setting, Debian makes it far more difficult to keep every system in sync. With Fedora, you can run Fedora Core 1 on every system and recieve security updates as they are released - just as you can with Windows. With Debian, you have to run Stable if you want a single set of packages with only security upgrades.
The whole "Stable"/"Unstable"/"Testing" thing runs completely counter to the rest of the industry. Microsoft releases a new OS every few years and then only releases incremental bug-fixes and security upgrades. Thus, when you are running "Windows XP", you are running a specific set of packages with a specific configuration system and specific interface. How is a business supposed to get support for "Debian Unstable"? Are they supposed to thell the support company the versions of every package on their system? What if they want to get security upgrades without signifigantly changing their system?
With Debian, a business would be forced to use Stable if they wanted a stable, supported platform. Unfortunately, stable is filled with old packages. Fedora Core 1 is tested and stable. You can call up LinuxCare (or another corporation), tell them that you are using "Fedora Core 1", and get support for configuration and other issues. You can't do that with Debian Unstable.
"That said, this is why most people in the know *do* run Debian Unstable and apt-get update && upgrade daily, because it is desktop where stability is not as mission critical."
You just admitted that Debian's releases are so old that people "in the know" are using an unstable release. With Fedora, you get a tested, polished release with modern software. There isn't a need to worry about your packages changing (or not working) tomorrow because you ran "apt-get update && upgrade". You can get security patches and still keep everything the way it is.
This is actually not the first PowerPC Mac emulator for x86. SheepShaver has been able to run PowerPC Mac OS (only up to Mac OS 8.6, not OS X) for some time now. It's from the developer of the excellent Basilisk II emulator.
Hopefully, the two projects will collaborate and help improve the performance of the emulator until it is usable. 1/20th of actual CPU speed would be acceptable.
"Windows users might have it by 2007"
Longhorn will likely ship in 2006.
Moreover, the DCE goes far beyond what Quartz extreme does. QE is actually quite primitive - very few operations are GPU accelerated. That's why window resizing is still horribly slow.
"K8 - 193mm^2"
SledgeHammer (Opteron) at 130nm with 1024K of L2 Cache is 193mm^2. Newcastle (Athlon 64) with 512K of L2 Cache at 90nm will be far smaller.
Remember that Athlon XP "Thoroughbred-B" has an 80mm^2 die size. That's why my Athlon XP was so cheap. AMD has been shipping a CPU smaller than Pentium-M for over two years.
"Pentium-M"
Banias at 130nm is 100mm^2.
"Also, there's been some reporting on The Inq to the effect of Intel wanting to drive down costs. There's a reason Prescott is dead end."
I agree fully. NetBurst has run out of gas. Comparing clock to increase in benchmarks proves that.
"Yeah, and they sold it to you while losing money because they're such nice guys."
AMD is interested in profit. They are not "nice guys". AMD is *still* selling Athlon XP 2600+ CPUs for $84. And they continue to introduce lower and lower priced Athlon 64s.
"The question is if the market is going to go in the ultra-value direction or not, and if it does, the P-M is probably the best positioned."
Why? Athlon 64 is far better positioned for one big reason: integrated memory controller.
In the untra-low end, reducing the number of traces on the board and the number of chips on the board means reducing costs.
NVIDIA's NForce3 250 is a single-chip northbridge/southbridge. AMD's integrated memory controller eliminates the need for a northbridge. HyperTransport decreases the number of traces between the northbridge (northbridge/southbridge) and the CPU.
Not to mention that AMD could *still* ship Athlon XP to meet the low end. It has die sizes that compare very nicely to Pentium-M.
"Why not $50 computers?"
Because there is no margin. Assume the computer costs nothing to produce (of course, this is impossible). This leaves $50 to test, market, ship, and support the computer. It is doubtful that computer corporations could even make money on such a product.
"Intel is reputed to have the best process technology."
Intel does have the best process technology. AMD is at least six months behind. However, that does not mean that AMD cannot deliver a cost-competitive part.
"The NEW AMD is trying to reposition themselves as a high-end provider"
Want to know why? It's because you can't make any money selling CPUs at $10 a pop (a requirement for your $50 computer). Intel knows this. AMD knows this. Assuming a margin of $5, Intel would have to sell 3 *billion* CPUs to meet 2003 revenues (30 billion, assume 50% from CPUs).
AMD wants to sell higher-end parts because that's how you make profit.
Intel can marginalize the business if they want. Historically, they have avoided doing this because it would send their stock through the floor (imagine a 30% dip in revenue in one year). They aren't stupid.
"Open source developers are not your employee/slave, they will do whatever the hell they want and, as a user, you should just feel fortunate that your needs were similar to the coder's."
WRONG attitude, man. Open-source devlopers *should* be concerned about the needs of their users.
Linux will NEVER take off with this attitude.
THE NEEDS OF NORMAL PEOPLE DO NOT SQUARE WITH THE NEEDS OF THE DEVELOPERS. IF OPEN SOURCE DEVELOPERS DO NOT DEVELOP SOFTWARE THAT REFLECTS THE NEEDS OF NORMAL PEOPLE, THAN NORMAL PEOPLE WILL PAY FOR SOFTWARE THAT DOES.
USERS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO ALIGN THEIR NEEDS TO THE NEEDS OF THE CODERS. OPEN SOURCE DEVELOPERS SHOULD CONCENTRATE ON THE NEEDS OF THEIR USERS, AND IF THEY EVER HOPE FOR THOSE USERS TO BE NORMAL PEOPLE, THEY HAD BETTER FOCUS ON THE NEEDS OF NORMAL PEOPLE.
That feels much better.
This attitude of "fix it yourself" or "I don't need that so why whould anyone" is idiodic. We all preach that we want the world to use Linux and open source solutions. Yet, if we do not build software that reflects their needs, why should they use open-soruce software?
"Every newbie who wants to have a longterm relationship with open source must come to terms with this."
No, they don't. The GNOME project understands that it doesn't have to be that way. That's why lots of Slashdot users *hate* what is happening with GNOME. GNOME is attempting to be a desktop for normal people. It is not designed for Linux hackers. GNOME doesn't reflect the needs of the coders, it reflects the needs of the users.
Your attitude is elitist. This "newbie" is the child yelling that the Emperor has no clothes. You are too concieted to realize that open-source software *can* and *must* reflect the needs of the user if it ever wants to be accepted.
No, they aren't.
"XP Reloaded" as it is internall codenamed is simply XP SP2 plus a new version of Windows Media Player.
It will be free to all current XP users.
"XP Reloaded" is not really a new product at all. It is simply a "refresh" of XP that includes all of the features available for free to XP customers (.NET, Windows Movie Maker, SP2) plus a new version of Meida Player.
http://www.winsupersite.com/faq/xp_reloaded.asp
"Intel can make Pentiums cheaper than AMD can make K8s"
That's a big assumption. AMD has always tried to keep a per-die cost lead on Intel. They do this by keeping their die-size down so that they achieve higher yields. That's why most of AMD's future low-end Athlon 64s have 1/2 as much L2 cache as the Pentium-M or P4 Prescott.
"If Intel drive the cost of PCs down a couple hundred bucks, AMD will be marooned in the high end workstation market"
Huh? If the costs of PCs decreases by a couple of hundred bucks, they will be free.
This makes no sense. AMD has *always* had a price lead in the low end. My Athlon XP 2600+ was $84 and it beats any Intel chip under $150. Moreover, AMD has consistantly pushed the price of Atlon 64 down since introduction. You can now get an Athlon 64 2800+ for around $175.
"The P-M is even cheaper to make than the P4."
Where did you get that fact? Northwood Pentium 4s are certainly cheaper to manufacture than the Pentium-M (die size, mostly). Intel does not disclose their per-die costs and thus it is impossible to determine which is cheaper to manufacture.
"Intel can also demand a much higher profit margin."
Not necessarily. Intel has been forced to drop their margin substantially since AMD introduced the Athlon several years ago. That's why the P4 2.6GHz is only $156.
"be forced to sell at a loss (which they've done before)"
It is not clear if AMD ever sold CPUs at a loss. They have made substantial losses as a corporation in the last few years, but that is likely because of fixed costs like the development of K8 and Fab 30.
"Your mom is a whore, I slept with her just last night. Jesus."
I doubt that very much.
"What the fuck is wrong with you?"
People like you who think that it's funny to use profane language in response to a perfectly valid comment.
"Itanium is dead on the desktop."
Itanium was never alive on the desktop. It is, and always was, designed and marketed as a *server* CPU.
"gpu"
Today's mobile GPUs (not the Intel Integrated garbage) can draw just as much wattage as the CPU (a Pentium-M and a Mobility Radeon 9600 are about the same).
Now, as long as you don't play games, the GPU won't draw much current. However, if you're just surfing the web or typing, the CPU isn't drawing much either. In this situation, the screen would likely become the largest power draw.
"Cheap, light, and fast, pick three; I like cheap and light."
OK, then.
Go on eBay. You can get a Compaq Armada M300 (PIII 600, up to 384M of memory) for around $350. It's got a 11.5" XGA screen, it's 3.1lbs (including battery), and very thin and light (magnesium alloy case). It runs Windows XP and Linux fine, has a Cardbus slot for a wifi card, built in 56K and 10/100 ethernet, ATI Rage graphics with 4MB (horrible 3D, but fine for 2D), and a nice keyboard. Not to mention the fact that the power adaptor is tiny, and you can get a nice dock which only increases the thickness to around 1.2" (without changing the size otherwise) and adds a floppy + another drive (DVD-ROM+CD-RW, DVD burner, etc.).
Ask Jeeves has recently backported parts of their Teoma engine into ask.com. It's actually not too bad of a search engine.
Teoma is useful when searching for things like product reveiws. Typically, Google has been flooded with spam for these types of searches.
"Users didn't want to put up with logout as user, log in as administrator, install/config, log out as administrator, log in as user. For UNIX, that isn't necessary."
It's not necessary with Windows either. The "run as" command has no problems running installers or other graphical applications.
Heck, I've installed service packs fine using "run as".
Not to mention the fact that you can set Windows Installer to automatically request administrator privelages.
Why is this any different from Linux?
"Java and C# can't touch this, nor was this the purpose for which they were designed."
.NET CLR. The .NET CLR runs a VM-bytecode (similar to Java). Microsoft is pushing it as the future of their operating system.
That isn't necessarily so. Microsoft is attempting to replace the Win32 API with the
There is no reason why a JIT-compiled language cannot meet or even exceed the performance of a precompiled language. Although C and C++ may be the languages of choice today, they may not be tomorrow.
Java has already been used to develop the operating system for mobile devices like the Danger Hiptop. It has become the standard for programming on cellular telephones and is uickly gaining support on PDAs. As of yet, Java has had limited success on the desktop, but thanks to faster computers and better runtimes, this may change.
Writing off Java and C# as "passing languages" is a bad idea. Programmers (and users) are beginning to value security and stability above raw performance. The performance of such programs is often "good enough" that it is not an issue for most users.
By your logic, FORTRAN should outlast C. FORTRAN is used extensively by scientific and technical applications because it optimizes better than C (and certainly better than C++).