I've honestly never seen any profit statements concerning sega.net or pso have you? - its true that PSO ver 2 requires a credit card, but they did knock 10 bucks off the product.
The dreamcast in general was a relatively successful product in the US - it wasn't as profitable in Japan - which is why they pulled the plug. (that and the PS2).
You never had a dreamcast did you?
on
XBox Released
·
· Score: 1
an ethernet connection on a console isn't some gaming messiah
Obviously from someone who never ever played PSO... After racking up several hundred hours on PSO using my DC ethernet card (through my linux router) I said to myself - I can't imagine why a console *wouldn't* have one of these.
Your kidding right? I switched to cable from adsl and never looked back - 8 megabits (and I frequently get that) for 25$ per month is heaven on earth:).
It is true - they seem to filter things like Kazaa (I don't know this for a fact) - but I can still talk to Kazaa people on @home.
Its american - why is that important? Because we have an american company advocating it and this has nothing to do with patriotism.
Go out and get a Playstation 2 or a GC - 90% of all the greatest titles for it reside in Japan where they will in most likelyhood stay - unless your brave or wealthy enough to hack up your PS2 or GC or buy the japanese version you'll not be playing these titles - ever. And for the most part its for lack of companies to release it in the US (although sega used to do this so they could boost the amount of titles availble for the DC). Come microsoft - I'd hope they would use their developers to bring cool video games to the xbox - and localize japanese titles.
Face it - SCEA and Nintendo America could really care less if there are really cool titles in the US. I don't know why, but there are like maybe on the outside edge of an estimate 65 titles for the PS2 - for a game console that has been out for a year in the US and 2 in Japan. There are thousands of titles for it in Japan, but like I said we'll never see these.
The thing is there is nothing stopping nintendo from doing the same thing. From what I hear nintendo has money coming from all sorts of really big investments - not to mention they are a really old company who has been around for quite a while.
That would seem to make sense, but my ATA-100 IBM Deskstar does seem considerably faster on a ATA-100 bus. The OS loads faster, apps load faster - and it seems to benchmark faster. What I'm guessing is that repetitive reads and writes are cached on its 2 meg cache chip - that data can be moved from the drive at ATA-100 speeds.
I've found this to be the same case with scsi as well. Plus I found in doing snapshots on raid controllers and filers on changed files is that most people only edit less then 10% of the data on any one drive - you could cache that and come up with some impressive speeds.
I'm horrified at how IDE has flourished. It's the worst possible standard for a drive interface.
So what is a better drive standard? Lets go through the options... and then you can reply and tell me what is better.
SCSI - sure, if you completely ignore scsi-hell - or the process of setting a scsi chain up. Yes 99% of the time it works just fine. But for some reason don't put a Seagate drive on the same chain as an IBM drive (seriously). I'm not even talking about 300~400$ ultra 3 capable controllers or the 200$+ 18 gig drivers that go along with them.
Firewire - sure there are Firewire cases, but those are just firewire to scsi adapters or firewire to IDE adapters. Most drive manufactures have already said no to native firewire drives because its a) a closed standard and b) you have to pay royalties on that standard. Besides it still doesn't sync faster then IDE.
One standard I always liked was the Commodore serial bus - sure it was slow then. But think of all the cool things it could do. 14 devices (printers, modems, floppy disk drives, hard drives etc), you can daisy chain them, they auto-terminate, and they had a burst mode.
Well the thing is it makes sense if you have a product your trying to interface with that is already running ms-sql.
In my experience MS-SQL server is just fine for an office - maybe a couple hundred users - maybe even several thousand users.
But connect that database to AOL's userbase - which is what we do. Expand your mindset of the largest database you've ever seen by maybe 100 times (seriously) and then ask your self - is there an NT server out there that can compete with two Sun Enterprise 4500's both with 8 cpu's and over 8000 megs of ram each? Is there a linux machine that could?
Thats only partially true - the fact remains that the reason people use linux and are porting software to linux in such quantities is because of cheap readily availble hardware. I can go down to any PC store and build a linux machine for like 500$ that will perform rather well. I can buy sun ATX motherboards but they cost like over 1000$ each.
I found this out as a unix admin for a small.com that has a very very very large database running on oracle server. The only reason they bought an Enterprise 4500 is because at the time it was really the only machine that would run Oracle server (an no oracle server is still crap on linux). The thing cost like 250,000$. There have been several situations I've been involved with where we had to buy Sun, HP, IBM and very rarely SGI because the applications running on them only ran on those machines running their respective OS's. Most companies I've worked for recently don't buy into Windows or some proprietary OS if they can't help it - but a lot of times its unavoidable.
Personally I'd love some MS guy to come by and tell me how some NT/2000/XP server could manage a database with over a billion enteries in it.
Are they still around? The first linux distro I ever used was Yggdrasil - I still have the install disk - came with linux kernel version 1.1.x for some reason - this was in 93~94. It was as I recall a very by the seat of your pants distro - you had to install packages by hand from tar.gz files and partition and format your own disks by hand.
The word rpmfind.net should send shivers down your spine. Especially if your like me and have to support a bunch of redhat 6.2 systems.
I switched to debian and never looked back - its really nice just to be able to type "apt-get install " and have it just install it (including dependancies) - or to just be able to upgrade the distro with a single command. Debian also simplfies configuration (for the most part) - for instance I can look at all my ethernet controller configs in one file - not two, or sometimes even eight or sixteen files (yes I do have a system with 16 controllers in it). Trust me - Redhat almost seems like a toy after you really get to know debian.
I agree, but the installer needs some work - other then that its great:).
One thing they could add is a much easier partitioning system - maybe something like redhat's - I'm supposed to rely on my memory on what paritions did what and so on with debian - usually it works out though.
And I ran into an interesting bug with a 2.2 installer disk - when it goes to initialize the modules it looks in the wrong dir - I ended up having to make a symlink (in the second console) to continue on with the install.
Yeah, but thats not the kind of firewall an ISP would use. I'm not a CNA, but we've got a cisco PIX here, and I really can't figure out how to could filter traffic based on what client you were using (netscape, IE, gnutella etc).
Well the way I understand it is that they don't send the whole tape measure up - they just want the flexible material inside - so they take it all out and set it up so that a catch releases and the antenna pops out to a set wavelength - never to pop back in.
In my experience with Amatuer Sattelites its usually the transmitter that fails - or its power supply, not the antenna. n7wsb:).
I think gnutella runs over port 80 if I'm not mistaken... Luckily I've never seen a firewall that is selective on what traffic goes through based on client:).
Very cool, if it weren't for the fact that they destroyed a motherboard and a processor in the process of installing it I'd be more interested in getting one:).
Yeah - I guess. Lately though I've had the skills and then some - and a degree, but they have been nailing me on having 23 months of IT experience instead of 24 like the application required.
Two years ago I could walk right off the street into almost any.com and get a nice job - these days IT monkey's, sys admins and the like are literally 100's per application.
What about when the job says "4 year bachelors degree required" - which is something I've seen lately? The only reason they do that is to thin out the applicants.
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, but the only reason they did so - was so they could share profits with nintendo. Honestly - why do you think companies release products?
I've honestly never seen any profit statements concerning sega.net or pso have you? - its true that PSO ver 2 requires a credit card, but they did knock 10 bucks off the product.
The dreamcast in general was a relatively successful product in the US - it wasn't as profitable in Japan - which is why they pulled the plug. (that and the PS2).
Obviously from someone who never ever played PSO... After racking up several hundred hours on PSO using my DC ethernet card (through my linux router) I said to myself - I can't imagine why a console *wouldn't* have one of these.
Your kidding right? I switched to cable from adsl and never looked back - 8 megabits (and I frequently get that) for 25$ per month is heaven on earth :).
It is true - they seem to filter things like Kazaa (I don't know this for a fact) - but I can still talk to Kazaa people on @home.
What about all the borrowed bsd code that is under a similar license that requires you to give credit?
Its american - why is that important? Because we have an american company advocating it and this has nothing to do with patriotism.
Go out and get a Playstation 2 or a GC - 90% of all the greatest titles for it reside in Japan where they will in most likelyhood stay - unless your brave or wealthy enough to hack up your PS2 or GC or buy the japanese version you'll not be playing these titles - ever. And for the most part its for lack of companies to release it in the US (although sega used to do this so they could boost the amount of titles availble for the DC). Come microsoft - I'd hope they would use their developers to bring cool video games to the xbox - and localize japanese titles.
Face it - SCEA and Nintendo America could really care less if there are really cool titles in the US. I don't know why, but there are like maybe on the outside edge of an estimate 65 titles for the PS2 - for a game console that has been out for a year in the US and 2 in Japan. There are thousands of titles for it in Japan, but like I said we'll never see these.
The thing is there is nothing stopping nintendo from doing the same thing. From what I hear nintendo has money coming from all sorts of really big investments - not to mention they are a really old company who has been around for quite a while.
That would seem to make sense, but my ATA-100 IBM Deskstar does seem considerably faster on a ATA-100 bus. The OS loads faster, apps load faster - and it seems to benchmark faster. What I'm guessing is that repetitive reads and writes are cached on its 2 meg cache chip - that data can be moved from the drive at ATA-100 speeds.
I've found this to be the same case with scsi as well. Plus I found in doing snapshots on raid controllers and filers on changed files is that most people only edit less then 10% of the data on any one drive - you could cache that and come up with some impressive speeds.
I'm horrified at how IDE has flourished. It's the worst possible standard for a drive interface.
So what is a better drive standard? Lets go through the options... and then you can reply and tell me what is better.
SCSI - sure, if you completely ignore scsi-hell - or the process of setting a scsi chain up. Yes 99% of the time it works just fine. But for some reason don't put a Seagate drive on the same chain as an IBM drive (seriously). I'm not even talking about 300~400$ ultra 3 capable controllers or the 200$+ 18 gig drivers that go along with them.
Firewire - sure there are Firewire cases, but those are just firewire to scsi adapters or firewire to IDE adapters. Most drive manufactures have already said no to native firewire drives because its a) a closed standard and b) you have to pay royalties on that standard. Besides it still doesn't sync faster then IDE.
One standard I always liked was the Commodore serial bus - sure it was slow then. But think of all the cool things it could do. 14 devices (printers, modems, floppy disk drives, hard drives etc), you can daisy chain them, they auto-terminate, and they had a burst mode.
Well the thing is it makes sense if you have a product your trying to interface with that is already running ms-sql.
In my experience MS-SQL server is just fine for an office - maybe a couple hundred users - maybe even several thousand users.
But connect that database to AOL's userbase - which is what we do. Expand your mindset of the largest database you've ever seen by maybe 100 times (seriously) and then ask your self - is there an NT server out there that can compete with two Sun Enterprise 4500's both with 8 cpu's and over 8000 megs of ram each? Is there a linux machine that could?
Thats only partially true - the fact remains that the reason people use linux and are porting software to linux in such quantities is because of cheap readily availble hardware. I can go down to any PC store and build a linux machine for like 500$ that will perform rather well. I can buy sun ATX motherboards but they cost like over 1000$ each.
.com that has a very very very large database running on oracle server. The only reason they bought an Enterprise 4500 is because at the time it was really the only machine that would run Oracle server (an no oracle server is still crap on linux). The thing cost like 250,000$. There have been several situations I've been involved with where we had to buy Sun, HP, IBM and very rarely SGI because the applications running on them only ran on those machines running their respective OS's. Most companies I've worked for recently don't buy into Windows or some proprietary OS if they can't help it - but a lot of times its unavoidable.
I found this out as a unix admin for a small
Personally I'd love some MS guy to come by and tell me how some NT/2000/XP server could manage a database with over a billion enteries in it.
Are they still around? The first linux distro I ever used was Yggdrasil - I still have the install disk - came with linux kernel version 1.1.x for some reason - this was in 93~94. It was as I recall a very by the seat of your pants distro - you had to install packages by hand from tar.gz files and partition and format your own disks by hand.
The word rpmfind.net should send shivers down your spine. Especially if your like me and have to support a bunch of redhat 6.2 systems.
I switched to debian and never looked back - its really nice just to be able to type "apt-get install " and have it just install it (including dependancies) - or to just be able to upgrade the distro with a single command. Debian also simplfies configuration (for the most part) - for instance I can look at all my ethernet controller configs in one file - not two, or sometimes even eight or sixteen files (yes I do have a system with 16 controllers in it). Trust me - Redhat almost seems like a toy after you really get to know debian.
Well to a certian extent yes - Debian does support RPM files (not out of the default install) and so do many other distros.
I agree, but the installer needs some work - other then that its great :).
One thing they could add is a much easier partitioning system - maybe something like redhat's - I'm supposed to rely on my memory on what paritions did what and so on with debian - usually it works out though.
And I ran into an interesting bug with a 2.2 installer disk - when it goes to initialize the modules it looks in the wrong dir - I ended up having to make a symlink (in the second console) to continue on with the install.
Yeah, but thats not the kind of firewall an ISP would use. I'm not a CNA, but we've got a cisco PIX here, and I really can't figure out how to could filter traffic based on what client you were using (netscape, IE, gnutella etc).
Well the way I understand it is that they don't send the whole tape measure up - they just want the flexible material inside - so they take it all out and set it up so that a catch releases and the antenna pops out to a set wavelength - never to pop back in.
:).
In my experience with Amatuer Sattelites its usually the transmitter that fails - or its power supply, not the antenna. n7wsb
I think gnutella runs over port 80 if I'm not mistaken... Luckily I've never seen a firewall that is selective on what traffic goes through based on client :).
Oh thats really flamebait - we can diss on windows machines all we want - and this isn't even a diss.
:).
Someone's gonna get metamoderated
I know - I've taken to lying on applications when necessary these days.
Anyhoo I live in Portland Oregon - apparently the #2 capital of America for unemployment.
Very cool, if it weren't for the fact that they destroyed a motherboard and a processor in the process of installing it I'd be more interested in getting one :).
Yeah - I guess. Lately though I've had the skills and then some - and a degree, but they have been nailing me on having 23 months of IT experience instead of 24 like the application required.
.com and get a nice job - these days IT monkey's, sys admins and the like are literally 100's per application.
Two years ago I could walk right off the street into almost any
Hey, give Apple a chance - they're a little new to this Unix thing. Heh. MacOS X fully rocks.
Isn't that what beta testing is for? Oh yeah - thats what apple uses their users for...
Seriously though - nothing pisses me off more then data loss. HD dieing is one thing, flakey software is another.
Tell that to my Ipaq which sports a perfectly usable 345 meg IBM microdrive.
Its a real hard-drive even whines like one. I tell people my ipaq can do just about anything a desktop computer can do, but people rarely believe me.
What about when the job says "4 year bachelors degree required" - which is something I've seen lately? The only reason they do that is to thin out the applicants.