What, like the fact he actually fought for and was decorated by his country rather than using the family influence to ensure he wouldn't be shipped to Vietnam and then going AWOL whilst on National Guard duty? Yeah, that's a major bummer.
Why? The current XBox uses a custom 733MHz Intel CPU (akin to a Celeron or Pentium III according to some sources) so wouldn't moving over to a faster part based on the Pentium 4 make sense? At least that would make it a lot easier to maintain...
2. Backwards compatibility.
This is a must. The Sony Playstation 2 managed it and it wasn't "seriously crippled" by it. Nowadays, it's what gamers demand: they don't want to throw out their collection of old favourites because they won't work with the new machine, they want the new machine to run those games.
In a way, by promoting backwards compatibility out of the box with the PS2, Sony has set the standard on this issue. If Microsoft drops the ball on this one then bye-bye XBox Next.
As the analyst in the article said, "I can't imagine that Microsoft would be so insanely stupid as to make it incompatible."
3. No hard disk drive.
Well, if you're going to maintain backwards compatibility then you're going to need that HDD. But how does removing the HDD make any kind of sense? HDDs are cheap and spacious compared to the alternatives.
Unless Microsoft is building a $1,000 console, how does replacing the HDD with Flash RAM make any kind of sense?
Is Microsoft really this intent on screwing up with XBox Next?
Is that all US government reports now have to have to be accompanied by "the correct cover sheet". Oh, and all White House press conferences must have at least "fifteen pieces of flair".
According to the article, speculation has been made that 'Rather than being round, nuclei in that region and beyond could contain bubbles and have strange doughnut-like shapes'.
Containing bubbles and doughnut-like shapes? I say they should be called Duffium and Homerium.
The installing Linux issue is relevant, more so than installing Windows precisely because most Windows users have had their OS pre-installed by their PC manufacturer. How many people in comparison have Linux pre-installed on their PC?
And how are these users going to switch to Linux? By installing it themselves. (Sure, some people will be able to call upon a Linux old-hand to help them out, but not everyone will be so fortunate.) The Linux installation needs to be easier, or at least more user-friendly, to cater for these people.
Also, you're overlooking the fact that OEMs aren't about to give customers what they don't want. And 99.9 percent of their customers want Windows, so OEMs ship their PCs with Windows. When people start asking for Linux by name within an order of magnitude of how often they ask for Windows, then manufacturers will start offering Linux as a standard offering. Until then, pre-installed Linux systems will be limited to niche PCs (eg, servers) and smaller vendors.
The point is, Germany went largely unchallenged for 5 years before the US got involved.
Way to fucking rewrite history. Britain, Frace, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Norway and others were all actively at war with Germany way before the US got reluctantly dragged into the war in Europe. Britain, Australia and New Zealand also fought against Japan in Asia and the Pacific Rim.
Please, pick up a book or something every once in a while. The world doesn't revolve around the US.
Is a dissection always necessary? The films aren't verbatim renditions of the books and I don't think there are too many people that would have wanted them so. I for one am glad that some things were dropped (eg, Tom Bombadil) and that other things were added.
Quite frankly, the LOTR trilogy is perhaps the best fantasy/sci-fi book to film adaptation of all time. I mean, you only have to look at how Hollywood managed to screw up Dune to see how bad it can get: nobody who hasn't already read the book has a chance of following what's going on and why because the film leaves out vital chunks of the storyline. (Yes, I know about the history behind the making of that film. Let's not go into that here please.)
In contrast, Peter Jackson's adaptation left out few things that anyone but a die-hard fan would call vital. Where he did cull the story was where it was needed if the story was to translate onto the silver screen successfully. And when he did cull, he culled gently.
Remember, the Extended Editions contain a lot of extra scenes and footage and flesh out the story further, but even then they aren't everything Tolkien wrote; if they had been then the films would have lasted five to six hours minimum, at which point they become more tour de force and less entertainment.
As I said, Jackson's trilogy is fantastic. Personally, I'd like to thank him for giving a literary classic the respectful treatment it deserves.
I just read the story summary and was thinking the same thing.
But somehow, if you dare question why we're getting so still getting dupes, inaccurate stories and old "news", then you're shot down as flamebait: must be nice having unlimited moderation so you can silence anyone who dares ask anything you don't want to answer.
Reread the post we're talking about. His point was that there is nothing in his house worth stealing, and that anyone who did break in is in for a whole lot of pain from someone who knows how to defend themselves and who keeps very dangerous pets. It wasn't about him not being the guy, it was about him being a guy who you don't want to mess with. In that context, the Amish reference kinda fell flat.
Are we now going to see a flood of other posts from older stories reposted to the front page as "news"?
I know I'm going to get flamed to hell and back for this, but do any of the editors read the site or research the articles that they are about to post at all?
We've had this, the domain naming patent dupe, the BBC buying Google News keywords story (which had a completely inaccurate story summary and which was put in the censorship category - censorship how?), and the Defcon convention that took place "last weekend" (read, several weekends ago, last summer) all in the last few days.
Can someone please tell me what the editors actually do? Cos I'm buggered if I know.
Shhh, this is Slashdot, 99.9 percent of the people couldn't tell you the difference but like to think they could. Please, don't shatter their illusions.
(Cue 20 flames from people who can tell the difference.)
Yeah, I thought that. Boo.com shot themselves in the foot in so many ways. They hired so many people and offices in prime rental locations (eg, London's Carnaby Street), they partied like it was 1999 (which it was), they were locked down to one OS, one browser and one plug-in (thereby drastically reducing their potential customer base) and they started advertising before they were up and running.
But perhaps their worst mistake is what they chose to sell. Clothing. We're tactile people. Some materials feel good to one person, vile to another. We don't always fit into clothes that we should fit into. Size 8 seems to mean different things to different manufacturers. Etc, etc.
Buying clothes before you've seen them is, quite frankly, pretty stupid. That's why even catalogue companies that sell clothes mail order let you try them at home and return them free of charge if you don't like them: they realise that if they didn't give people that option then they'd soon go out of business.
There are reasons why Amazon.com et al sell books, CDs, videos and DVDs so well. The first is because there's a large demand for these items. The second is because the public is happy buying them from almost anyone because they are known quantities: it doesn't really matter who you buy your Madonna CD from, it's the Madonna CD you were after, not aftersales support for it. The third is that these are "sell and forget" items: once you've sold a book you just move onto selling the next copy; you don't have to worry about it being returned because it's the wrong size or colour or too abrasive or lacks big enough pockets or anything else.
Of all the dot.bombs, Boo strikes me as perhaps the most ridiculous. I mean, I could see the problems they were going to have even before they were ready to take orders, so why couldn't they? Were they too busy having a good time?
Maybe seed Google with your own bogus details, "John is Amish and does not own any consumer electronics worth stealing, he has a black belt in Karate and breeds rattlesnakes as a hobby..."
He just posted a comment on Slashdot. Last time I checked, there weren't too many Amish people using the 'net. Gee, I wonder why...
Want to see ineptness in office? Check 1600 Penn. Avenue, Washington DC. You can't miss it, it's the big white building with a curved, nay oval, central section and lots of security guards posted everywhere.
Please, realise that the OED is not canon. Look up "parentheses definition" with Google, etc and you'll find that "{" and "}" are indeed parentheses to non-Americans. (Or curly brackets if you want to be less formal.)
Slashdot Mirror
What, like the fact he actually fought for and was decorated by his country rather than using the family influence to ensure he wouldn't be shipped to Vietnam and then going AWOL whilst on National Guard duty? Yeah, that's a major bummer.
Well, here are a few quick thoughts:
1. Moving to a PPC CPU?
Why? The current XBox uses a custom 733MHz Intel CPU (akin to a Celeron or Pentium III according to some sources) so wouldn't moving over to a faster part based on the Pentium 4 make sense? At least that would make it a lot easier to maintain...
2. Backwards compatibility.
This is a must. The Sony Playstation 2 managed it and it wasn't "seriously crippled" by it. Nowadays, it's what gamers demand: they don't want to throw out their collection of old favourites because they won't work with the new machine, they want the new machine to run those games.
In a way, by promoting backwards compatibility out of the box with the PS2, Sony has set the standard on this issue. If Microsoft drops the ball on this one then bye-bye XBox Next.
As the analyst in the article said, "I can't imagine that Microsoft would be so insanely stupid as to make it incompatible."
3. No hard disk drive.
Well, if you're going to maintain backwards compatibility then you're going to need that HDD. But how does removing the HDD make any kind of sense? HDDs are cheap and spacious compared to the alternatives.
Unless Microsoft is building a $1,000 console, how does replacing the HDD with Flash RAM make any kind of sense?
Is Microsoft really this intent on screwing up with XBox Next?
Fans of CGA up in arms. Film at 11.
Is that all US government reports now have to have to be accompanied by "the correct cover sheet". Oh, and all White House press conferences must have at least "fifteen pieces of flair".
You forgot velcro.
I refer you to my earlier post on Slashdot Hate Days.
That's so ununfunny.
According to the article, speculation has been made that 'Rather than being round, nuclei in that region and beyond could contain bubbles and have strange doughnut-like shapes'.
Containing bubbles and doughnut-like shapes? I say they should be called Duffium and Homerium.
The installing Linux issue is relevant, more so than installing Windows precisely because most Windows users have had their OS pre-installed by their PC manufacturer. How many people in comparison have Linux pre-installed on their PC?
And how are these users going to switch to Linux? By installing it themselves. (Sure, some people will be able to call upon a Linux old-hand to help them out, but not everyone will be so fortunate.) The Linux installation needs to be easier, or at least more user-friendly, to cater for these people.
Also, you're overlooking the fact that OEMs aren't about to give customers what they don't want. And 99.9 percent of their customers want Windows, so OEMs ship their PCs with Windows. When people start asking for Linux by name within an order of magnitude of how often they ask for Windows, then manufacturers will start offering Linux as a standard offering. Until then, pre-installed Linux systems will be limited to niche PCs (eg, servers) and smaller vendors.
The point is, Germany went largely unchallenged for 5 years before the US got involved.
Way to fucking rewrite history. Britain, Frace, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Norway and others were all actively at war with Germany way before the US got reluctantly dragged into the war in Europe. Britain, Australia and New Zealand also fought against Japan in Asia and the Pacific Rim.
Please, pick up a book or something every once in a while. The world doesn't revolve around the US.
Is a dissection always necessary? The films aren't verbatim renditions of the books and I don't think there are too many people that would have wanted them so. I for one am glad that some things were dropped (eg, Tom Bombadil) and that other things were added.
Quite frankly, the LOTR trilogy is perhaps the best fantasy/sci-fi book to film adaptation of all time. I mean, you only have to look at how Hollywood managed to screw up Dune to see how bad it can get: nobody who hasn't already read the book has a chance of following what's going on and why because the film leaves out vital chunks of the storyline. (Yes, I know about the history behind the making of that film. Let's not go into that here please.)
In contrast, Peter Jackson's adaptation left out few things that anyone but a die-hard fan would call vital. Where he did cull the story was where it was needed if the story was to translate onto the silver screen successfully. And when he did cull, he culled gently.
Remember, the Extended Editions contain a lot of extra scenes and footage and flesh out the story further, but even then they aren't everything Tolkien wrote; if they had been then the films would have lasted five to six hours minimum, at which point they become more tour de force and less entertainment.
As I said, Jackson's trilogy is fantastic. Personally, I'd like to thank him for giving a literary classic the respectful treatment it deserves.
I just read the story summary and was thinking the same thing.
But somehow, if you dare question why we're getting so still getting dupes, inaccurate stories and old "news", then you're shot down as flamebait: must be nice having unlimited moderation so you can silence anyone who dares ask anything you don't want to answer.
Reread the post we're talking about. His point was that there is nothing in his house worth stealing, and that anyone who did break in is in for a whole lot of pain from someone who knows how to defend themselves and who keeps very dangerous pets. It wasn't about him not being the guy, it was about him being a guy who you don't want to mess with. In that context, the Amish reference kinda fell flat.
This "news" had already been pointed out by Kris pointed out in this post in the recent Han Solo in Lego Carbonite story.
Are we now going to see a flood of other posts from older stories reposted to the front page as "news"?
I know I'm going to get flamed to hell and back for this, but do any of the editors read the site or research the articles that they are about to post at all?
We've had this, the domain naming patent dupe, the BBC buying Google News keywords story (which had a completely inaccurate story summary and which was put in the censorship category - censorship how?), and the Defcon convention that took place "last weekend" (read, several weekends ago, last summer) all in the last few days.
Can someone please tell me what the editors actually do? Cos I'm buggered if I know.
Shhh, this is Slashdot, 99.9 percent of the people couldn't tell you the difference but like to think they could. Please, don't shatter their illusions.
(Cue 20 flames from people who can tell the difference.)
Are you sure of that? I'm not sure, ahem, I mean I'm uncertain, that it's that easy to tell.
I believe there's a monorail in Springfield, Illinois. It's well documented; I thought everyone knew about it?
Yeah, I thought that. Boo.com shot themselves in the foot in so many ways. They hired so many people and offices in prime rental locations (eg, London's Carnaby Street), they partied like it was 1999 (which it was), they were locked down to one OS, one browser and one plug-in (thereby drastically reducing their potential customer base) and they started advertising before they were up and running.
But perhaps their worst mistake is what they chose to sell. Clothing. We're tactile people. Some materials feel good to one person, vile to another. We don't always fit into clothes that we should fit into. Size 8 seems to mean different things to different manufacturers. Etc, etc.
Buying clothes before you've seen them is, quite frankly, pretty stupid. That's why even catalogue companies that sell clothes mail order let you try them at home and return them free of charge if you don't like them: they realise that if they didn't give people that option then they'd soon go out of business.
There are reasons why Amazon.com et al sell books, CDs, videos and DVDs so well. The first is because there's a large demand for these items. The second is because the public is happy buying them from almost anyone because they are known quantities: it doesn't really matter who you buy your Madonna CD from, it's the Madonna CD you were after, not aftersales support for it. The third is that these are "sell and forget" items: once you've sold a book you just move onto selling the next copy; you don't have to worry about it being returned because it's the wrong size or colour or too abrasive or lacks big enough pockets or anything else.
Of all the dot.bombs, Boo strikes me as perhaps the most ridiculous. I mean, I could see the problems they were going to have even before they were ready to take orders, so why couldn't they? Were they too busy having a good time?
Maybe seed Google with your own bogus details, "John is Amish and does not own any consumer electronics worth stealing, he has a black belt in Karate and breeds rattlesnakes as a hobby..."
He just posted a comment on Slashdot. Last time I checked, there weren't too many Amish people using the 'net. Gee, I wonder why...
Want to see ineptness in office? Check 1600 Penn. Avenue, Washington DC. You can't miss it, it's the big white building with a curved, nay oval, central section and lots of security guards posted everywhere.
...never to trust a press release issued on April 1st.
I was so sure that Thursday is Microsoft Hate Day.
PCs should not be used for sledgehammer testing.
(Yes, I have seen that video.)
iT so is.
Please, realise that the OED is not canon. Look up "parentheses definition" with Google, etc and you'll find that "{" and "}" are indeed parentheses to non-Americans. (Or curly brackets if you want to be less formal.)