Probably a good idea to recall that not only have they left OpenGL in a fairly pathetic state, but also that they had stunted *all* releases until developers had struggled through numerous hardly-usable revisions of DirectX.
More information is available in this piece: http://www.vcnet.com/bms/features/3d.html
... was created by the marketoids. As soon as people realized that this whole online advertising hack was a way to make some money, then they started creating these silly legal defenses that just end up circumventing the natural order of the technological system that permits the business to transpire in the first place.
It's funny how people have a tendency to take the law into their own hands the moment they think they have a handle on technology. I guess it's even funnier when judges go through with it.
It's too bad that these things can't be started with a "Please link to our main page!" and ended with a "Sure, no problem!"
Yup, everyone's a little too litigious these days. Hey, I bet people wouldn't sue as frivolously if it weren't so easy to communicate with their lawyers. Ooooh, let's ban telephones and e-mail!:D
I actually wonder whether or not Microsoft will find (after they've succeeded in their aims) that by making it all but impossible to fiddle with one's computer, they've decimated the pool of talented hardware and software engineers. They'll have lost the people who've had a genuine childhood interest in technology, and instead will have only the academically-initiated sheep who're basically just following the money. That would certainly be an interesting way of shooting themselves in the feet. Once Microsoft decides that all programmers need a "Windows Programming Certification" to compile Windows code, which in turn has a college degree as a prerequisite, I can't imagine any other result.
Heck, maybe that's what Microsoft wants. Maybe they feel that Windows has reached the pinnacle of software innovation, and has nowhere else to go...
Don't rule out the possibility that it's Microsoft. The X-Box is a very new sort of project from MS, and I wouldn't be surprised if they want to iron out any possible "security holes" (that's what they like to call these things nowadays, ala Palladium "security enhancements" that only protect the entertainment industry) in their hardware before they hack out the next revision. You might suppose that they could figure this sort of thing out themselves, but perhaps they've decided that it's cheaper this way.
The alternative is that this is so difficult that it never gets done.
Either way, Microsoft stands to benefit. Do you really think that having people buy the X-Box as a cheap Linux machine is that bad for them? It would be a mild slap in the face, in exchange for rolling out more X-Boxen. Establishing a presence is their goal.
But nevertheless, that point is extremely telling.
Rarely do we get such tangible evidence that the people creating spyware and breaking search engines actually are actually the sort of scum that we've all suspected them to be. I would say that that sentence is the most significant single bit of information in the entire piece; it ties said "appalling business ethics and greed" not just to profit-seeking, but to loathsome moral standards.
Everybody needs to start somewhere, and most people need a reason to switch (especially those weened entirely on Microsoft, who are used to changes being very hazardous). The Microsoft machine has a powerful marketing capacity, but it's not too difficult to pick up on the advantages of Linux, or of open source. Sure, newcomers will complain, but a few of them will stick with it. Some of these gamers are some really smart people who, importantly, care about what happens in the computing world (people who only use their computers for spreadsheets and word processors typically don't).
Linux has a place in the world. Please don't sabotage it by assuming that everyone has to be a network administrator or a programmer to benefit from it.
Don't worry. Even though your commentary is shortsighted, I think you're partly correct. If ever consumer technology does get to this point, the MPAA will have it outlawed.
Reminds me of the lunar base I designed when I was about 9 years old for a school project. Too bad I didn't have the backing of NASA or the ESA back then.
Geez, is it some sort of prerequisite that all Slashdot editors can't have had any friends as children??
Based on past experience, more than 50% of the posts in response to this story will be along the lines of "I'm perfectly happy with my system; I've had it for seven years and it recompiles Linux kernels just fine!" Frankly, I'm glad that at least a few developers are willing to push the envelope, or 1) computer hardware in general would be several years behind where it currently is, and 2) we wouldn't be enjoying rather stunning graphics in the products being released nowdays (admit it, some of the newer stuff is really looking pretty great!).
For those who wonder how such a title can be released simultaneously on a PS2, just assume that the texture and geometry detail will more than likely be kicked down a few notches. After all, consoles hook up to TV's, and TV's do all of 450 lines by 350 lines, at best. That's just typically the way of things
Furthermore, while I'm not too familiar with the specifics of FFXI, I'm fairly sure it's not coming out for awhile. Perhaps these requirements will seem more reasonable once the game comes out.
And on that note, I'll put concede that it might just be another sloppy console port, slow and ugly simply because the programmers slapped in some kludgy emulation code for the PC version. In which case all previous points are moot.
So is it wrong of me to buy a new computer every year to indulge my insatiable passion for gaming? I mean, as long as I don't shovel the old ones into a big heap and kill the environment by burning them?
Always remember that you're dealing with people who are traditionally more concerned with showcasing their elite attitudes toward computing than providing information and/or a reasonable perspective.
Slashdot: News for nerds. Non-nerds be damned!
Re:It's not about cost-effectiveness
on
Extreme Cooling
·
· Score: 1
that $500 is well-spent if it lets him clock his 1.6 GHz chip to 2.8 GHz.
A quick trip to newegg.com shows that a retail 1.6A GHz pentium 4 processor runs $137.00, while a retail 2.4 GHz northwood pentium 4 processor runs $564. Net difference: $427.
I understand that your post may be oriented as a general commentary on those who buy the latest and greatest, but looking at it from this basic price perspective, the ability to get a 2.8 GHz processor for another $500 almost becomes good financial sense for those who have the know-how (partly because of Intel's ridiculous pricing extremes).
This isn't the situation where you'd see the advantage to custom configuration. As I see it, the two main selling points of the big builders like Dell are 1) a good support base + warranties, and 2) great prices on the "mainstream", lower-end parts (i.e. the ones you seem to be looking at, which they get fantastic volume discounts on). So in your case, they've got the market nailed down.
Even if you feel these advantages aren't enough, then I think dealing with this many systems will just get out of hand too quickly to make it worthwhile.
It is and has been the case that with large companies like Dell and Gateway, the farther you go from the "standard configuration" the more disproportionately expensive the systems become. For a high-end PC, it just makes more sense to configure and build it yourself; we're talking the difference of $2000 self-built to $2750-$3000 from the large brands for identical or superior parts. This is pretty significant. Feel free to check me on these numbers, but for most buyers they're representative.
This isn't the case with the value PC's. Dell/Gateway/etc do the majority of their business on this venue, and because of their various volume discounts acquire they can meet this demand quite well. For instance, it's common knowledge that Dell can get fast processors from Intel at knock-out prices (then sell them with sub-par components in other areas to unsuspecting consumers, but that's another story). When you're looking for a real budget system (say, $750 sans display), it's very difficult to compete with their product; consider also the technical support and warranty offered by a big company, and it actually makes a lot of sense to buy from them.
By raising the prices across the board, it seems to me that they'd be losing their primary market advantage (or niche, if you will, huge though it may be). I already know I can get a better deal on high-end systems, so what real incentive does a non-beginner have to buy Dell or Gateway if they can go ahead and get value systems cheaper by setting them up manually? Not a whole lot.
Of course, for the past few years the non-beginner crowd hasn't been the domain of the big makers anyway (due to unreliable system quality, software bloat, lack of alternative operating systems, you name it), so my guess is that Dell won't be too concerned. However, a possible upside to this is that smaller vendors might get a healthy boost when they can again offer a price advantage on the low-end systems. If the big makers want to up their prices, they can go right ahead. But I sure do hope that the retail hardware vendors don't take this as a cue to raise their own prices in turn.
Always good to sneak in a jab at computer games and the people who play them in a post like this. However, since games like Counterstrike typically only consume some 1.5kB/s-3kB/s to operate normally, what exactly is meant by "hogging internal bandwidth"? Those numbers seem like very normal use of campus lines, even if the total packet throughput is above-average in a realtime UDP application.
This forum is populated by "computer people"; I frankly would've expected a little less antagonism towards Quake. This is not an unimportant topic. Granted, the average Slashdot user may consider themselves professionals in the field, and may harbor a certain disdain for the average game player, who may be young and/or obnoxious. Nevertheless, an attempt should be made to keep this in context, understanding that the Quake series has truly been groundbreaking in terms of online entertainment over the past few years. For thousands upon thousands of users, Quake--and games like it--inspire purchasing top-quality hardware at premium prices. While harnessing the power of Beowulf clusters to definitively factor massive integers holds a certain allure for technical persons, activities of this sort should be congratulated; they demonstrate that computers are entering realms that have in the past been dominated by less dynamic and more mundane systems (think many forms of sports, or even console-based video games). What lies on the horizon for computer gaming is absolutely astounding, and I think we can unanimously agree that this is just the beginning of more immersive and more ubiquitous game mediums, which will undoubtedly push realtime consumer-level graphics and networking that much further.
As a gamer, I've also gotta say that I'm amazed people reduce Quake to pointing and clicking. With five years under my belt I acknowledge that I have certain bias, but come on now. You may as well reduce the art of programming to the simple act of hammering repetitively on a keyboard. It's ridiculous. The players in a tournament like this have taken this game to a new level, and it's only fair to them that people not ridicule them by comparing it to Pong, Asteroid, or its other primitive ancestors. Come on, people like Carmack have done so much to popularize computers through the application of neat technology (unlike, say, AOL, which has more or less ridden the wave), give the complexity of it all some credit!
Slashdot Mirror
Probably a good idea to recall that not only have they left OpenGL in a fairly pathetic state, but also that they had stunted *all* releases until developers had struggled through numerous hardly-usable revisions of DirectX.
More information is available in this piece: http://www.vcnet.com/bms/features/3d.html
... was created by the marketoids. As soon as people realized that this whole online advertising hack was a way to make some money, then they started creating these silly legal defenses that just end up circumventing the natural order of the technological system that permits the business to transpire in the first place.
It's funny how people have a tendency to take the law into their own hands the moment they think they have a handle on technology. I guess it's even funnier when judges go through with it.
It's too bad that these things can't be started with a "Please link to our main page!" and ended with a "Sure, no problem!"
:D
Yup, everyone's a little too litigious these days. Hey, I bet people wouldn't sue as frivolously if it weren't so easy to communicate with their lawyers. Ooooh, let's ban telephones and e-mail!
I actually wonder whether or not Microsoft will find (after they've succeeded in their aims) that by making it all but impossible to fiddle with one's computer, they've decimated the pool of talented hardware and software engineers. They'll have lost the people who've had a genuine childhood interest in technology, and instead will have only the academically-initiated sheep who're basically just following the money. That would certainly be an interesting way of shooting themselves in the feet. Once Microsoft decides that all programmers need a "Windows Programming Certification" to compile Windows code, which in turn has a college degree as a prerequisite, I can't imagine any other result.
Heck, maybe that's what Microsoft wants. Maybe they feel that Windows has reached the pinnacle of software innovation, and has nowhere else to go...
Don't rule out the possibility that it's Microsoft. The X-Box is a very new sort of project from MS, and I wouldn't be surprised if they want to iron out any possible "security holes" (that's what they like to call these things nowadays, ala Palladium "security enhancements" that only protect the entertainment industry) in their hardware before they hack out the next revision. You might suppose that they could figure this sort of thing out themselves, but perhaps they've decided that it's cheaper this way.
The alternative is that this is so difficult that it never gets done.
Either way, Microsoft stands to benefit. Do you really think that having people buy the X-Box as a cheap Linux machine is that bad for them? It would be a mild slap in the face, in exchange for rolling out more X-Boxen. Establishing a presence is their goal.
Sure, the article is not about the button.
But nevertheless, that point is extremely telling.
Rarely do we get such tangible evidence that the people creating spyware and breaking search engines actually are actually the sort of scum that we've all suspected them to be. I would say that that sentence is the most significant single bit of information in the entire piece; it ties said "appalling business ethics and greed" not just to profit-seeking, but to loathsome moral standards.
Everybody needs to start somewhere, and most people need a reason to switch (especially those weened entirely on Microsoft, who are used to changes being very hazardous). The Microsoft machine has a powerful marketing capacity, but it's not too difficult to pick up on the advantages of Linux, or of open source. Sure, newcomers will complain, but a few of them will stick with it. Some of these gamers are some really smart people who, importantly, care about what happens in the computing world (people who only use their computers for spreadsheets and word processors typically don't).
Linux has a place in the world. Please don't sabotage it by assuming that everyone has to be a network administrator or a programmer to benefit from it.
Don't worry. Even though your commentary is shortsighted, I think you're partly correct. If ever consumer technology does get to this point, the MPAA will have it outlawed.
the best way for a buyer to be sure that he's buying quality software is to check whether or not it's sanctioned by Microsoft!
Impressive that you can narrow down a BSOD to the video drivers, out of all the possible causes.
Anyone crazy enough to vacation in Russia isn't going to be phased by this.
Reminds me of the lunar base I designed when I was about 9 years old for a school project. Too bad I didn't have the backing of NASA or the ESA back then.
Geez, is it some sort of prerequisite that all Slashdot editors can't have had any friends as children??
A few things.
Based on past experience, more than 50% of the posts in response to this story will be along the lines of "I'm perfectly happy with my system; I've had it for seven years and it recompiles Linux kernels just fine!" Frankly, I'm glad that at least a few developers are willing to push the envelope, or 1) computer hardware in general would be several years behind where it currently is, and 2) we wouldn't be enjoying rather stunning graphics in the products being released nowdays (admit it, some of the newer stuff is really looking pretty great!).
For those who wonder how such a title can be released simultaneously on a PS2, just assume that the texture and geometry detail will more than likely be kicked down a few notches. After all, consoles hook up to TV's, and TV's do all of 450 lines by 350 lines, at best. That's just typically the way of things
Furthermore, while I'm not too familiar with the specifics of FFXI, I'm fairly sure it's not coming out for awhile. Perhaps these requirements will seem more reasonable once the game comes out.
And on that note, I'll put concede that it might just be another sloppy console port, slow and ugly simply because the programmers slapped in some kludgy emulation code for the PC version. In which case all previous points are moot.
So is it wrong of me to buy a new computer every year to indulge my insatiable passion for gaming? I mean, as long as I don't shovel the old ones into a big heap and kill the environment by burning them?
Always remember that you're dealing with people who are traditionally more concerned with showcasing their elite attitudes toward computing than providing information and/or a reasonable perspective.
Slashdot: News for nerds. Non-nerds be damned!
that $500 is well-spent if it lets him clock his 1.6 GHz chip to 2.8 GHz.
A quick trip to newegg.com shows that a retail 1.6A GHz pentium 4 processor runs $137.00, while a retail 2.4 GHz northwood pentium 4 processor runs $564. Net difference: $427.
I understand that your post may be oriented as a general commentary on those who buy the latest and greatest, but looking at it from this basic price perspective, the ability to get a 2.8 GHz processor for another $500 almost becomes good financial sense for those who have the know-how (partly because of Intel's ridiculous pricing extremes).
This isn't the situation where you'd see the advantage to custom configuration. As I see it, the two main selling points of the big builders like Dell are 1) a good support base + warranties, and 2) great prices on the "mainstream", lower-end parts (i.e. the ones you seem to be looking at, which they get fantastic volume discounts on). So in your case, they've got the market nailed down.
Even if you feel these advantages aren't enough, then I think dealing with this many systems will just get out of hand too quickly to make it worthwhile.
It is and has been the case that with large companies like Dell and Gateway, the farther you go from the "standard configuration" the more disproportionately expensive the systems become. For a high-end PC, it just makes more sense to configure and build it yourself; we're talking the difference of $2000 self-built to $2750-$3000 from the large brands for identical or superior parts. This is pretty significant. Feel free to check me on these numbers, but for most buyers they're representative.
This isn't the case with the value PC's. Dell/Gateway/etc do the majority of their business on this venue, and because of their various volume discounts acquire they can meet this demand quite well. For instance, it's common knowledge that Dell can get fast processors from Intel at knock-out prices (then sell them with sub-par components in other areas to unsuspecting consumers, but that's another story). When you're looking for a real budget system (say, $750 sans display), it's very difficult to compete with their product; consider also the technical support and warranty offered by a big company, and it actually makes a lot of sense to buy from them.
By raising the prices across the board, it seems to me that they'd be losing their primary market advantage (or niche, if you will, huge though it may be). I already know I can get a better deal on high-end systems, so what real incentive does a non-beginner have to buy Dell or Gateway if they can go ahead and get value systems cheaper by setting them up manually? Not a whole lot.
Of course, for the past few years the non-beginner crowd hasn't been the domain of the big makers anyway (due to unreliable system quality, software bloat, lack of alternative operating systems, you name it), so my guess is that Dell won't be too concerned. However, a possible upside to this is that smaller vendors might get a healthy boost when they can again offer a price advantage on the low-end systems. If the big makers want to up their prices, they can go right ahead. But I sure do hope that the retail hardware vendors don't take this as a cue to raise their own prices in turn.
Always good to sneak in a jab at computer games and the people who play them in a post like this. However, since games like Counterstrike typically only consume some 1.5kB/s-3kB/s to operate normally, what exactly is meant by "hogging internal bandwidth"? Those numbers seem like very normal use of campus lines, even if the total packet throughput is above-average in a realtime UDP application.
Sure, if they lined them all up side-by-side in a straight line. Think more like a square 220^(1/2) = 14 human hairs to a side.
This forum is populated by "computer people"; I frankly would've expected a little less antagonism towards Quake. This is not an unimportant topic. Granted, the average Slashdot user may consider themselves professionals in the field, and may harbor a certain disdain for the average game player, who may be young and/or obnoxious. Nevertheless, an attempt should be made to keep this in context, understanding that the Quake series has truly been groundbreaking in terms of online entertainment over the past few years. For thousands upon thousands of users, Quake--and games like it--inspire purchasing top-quality hardware at premium prices. While harnessing the power of Beowulf clusters to definitively factor massive integers holds a certain allure for technical persons, activities of this sort should be congratulated; they demonstrate that computers are entering realms that have in the past been dominated by less dynamic and more mundane systems (think many forms of sports, or even console-based video games). What lies on the horizon for computer gaming is absolutely astounding, and I think we can unanimously agree that this is just the beginning of more immersive and more ubiquitous game mediums, which will undoubtedly push realtime consumer-level graphics and networking that much further.
As a gamer, I've also gotta say that I'm amazed people reduce Quake to pointing and clicking. With five years under my belt I acknowledge that I have certain bias, but come on now. You may as well reduce the art of programming to the simple act of hammering repetitively on a keyboard. It's ridiculous. The players in a tournament like this have taken this game to a new level, and it's only fair to them that people not ridicule them by comparing it to Pong, Asteroid, or its other primitive ancestors. Come on, people like Carmack have done so much to popularize computers through the application of neat technology (unlike, say, AOL, which has more or less ridden the wave), give the complexity of it all some credit!