I wouldn't trust those numbers from thecounter.com or any of the other sites that depend on user agent. Opera user here and I know for a fact that most of the time I have my user agent set to MSIE 6.0 otherwise a lot of sites give me problems and won't let me load them even though they render just fine. Those same sites a lot of times will load without a problem in firefox, when will web designers stop checking the damn user agent, it is a waste of time and just pisses people off. It has been getting better but still any analysis done that relies solely on user agent is not reliable in my book. I also would really love to have a true way to find out how close that 1% for Opera is to correct because I doubt it is correct.
How many users regard their frequent crashes as normal operation for a PC?
Since I have been using XP I do not regard frequent crashes as a normal operation and everytime it has occured it was due to hardware such as bad RAM. XP has been rock solid in my experience, I actually have only had to reinstall the whole OS once since I first installed it when it was released 5 years ago, and the reason I had to reinstall was because the hard disk I had it on went bad. As long as you have half a brain and take reasonable security precautions there is no reason that anybody could not have the same experience that I have had.
You will probably get modded up for being a MS basher even though not all of what you say is true. Sure, not everything they make works great or is brilliantly designed but I do not think that is a result of them specifically planning it that way which is what you seemed to be saying. They have come a long way in the last few years and occurances such as daily crashes are a thing of the past, so people need to stop bringing them up.
The XBox 360 Premium http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product_ id=4103879#Features+%26+Specifications includes component cables which allows HD, I cannot find anything on Sony's website http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/about.html that says it will even include those cables. Also, there does not yet exist an HDMI cable for the 360 so it is not even an option while for the PS3 since it is a normal HDMI output they can easily include an HDMI cable. Another big difference is the the PS3 premium system is TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS more than the XBox 360 premium bundle, for that much of a price difference they should include the god damn cable. Cables are not expensive to make, but stores (and console makers) love to charge a shitload for them.
So you fail this argument, the 360 includes the best cable that is available while the PS3 doesn't.
Any box that doesn't run Windows confuses most investigators.
You are far from correct. A lot of forensic investigators I have talked to actually use linux at times to do things such as image drives which is safer to do on linux than Windows and they are not straight Windows users.
Yep, all their tools are Windows-specific.
The reason they do use Windows tools most of the time is because the tried and true forensic applications are developed for Windows such as Forensic Toolkit Pro http://www.accessdata.com/products/ftk/ and EnCase http://www.guidancesoftware.com/products/ef_index. asp and since they work and have been well tested on Windows it makes little sense to increase the likelyhood of problems by porting these applications to other OS's. The other big reason most tools are Windows centric is obviously because Windows is the most widely used OS and people like to use what they already have and know.
Windows may not be the greatest OS, and I know people love to bash it, but that does not mean the Windows tools developed for forensic investigations are of low quality. I work as a software developer in this field so I have a decent view on what the situation is and your comment was way far off.
it makes no sense to raise the cost for everyone else to subsidize the cost for people who can probably better afford the cables anyway.
Raising the cost is not needed, the PS3 is already priced at $600, I think some cables can be added for a price that is already high already.
Could they not be including it because HDMI is a feature maybe 10% of the market will actually be able to use? Or given the fact that even though early adopters are more likely to *have* HDTVs, when they're in for a penny they're in for a pound, the marginal price increase for the top of the line input isn't going to scare anyone who already intends to buy one away.
I know it isn't going to scare people away, all that I am saying is the only reason they are not including them is because they want to have a bigger profit. I am saying this not something that should be cut out since it needed to get the highest level of quality out of the machine, a machine that is being marketed for its high definition ability. Being able to get that ability straight out of the box is something that in my opinion is a requirement. The HDMI cable is not an accessory, it is very necessary and they decided they can leave it out and make more profit instead which is shitty in my eyes for a SIX HUNDRED DOLLAR PRODUCT.
In the PS2/XBOX generation, and every console before that, RCA cables have been standard - composite cables sold for $30. The Xbox 360 Premium pack has composite built in, but the Core only has RCAs.
The average user will not spend $600 on a console either. The average user also doesn't care about high definition gaming (which this console is aimed at providing).
Consoles have always shipped with the most common, and basic, cable solution available.
Most consoles also didn't brag about how they can provide the best picture/graphics possible and then not provide that capability straight out of the box. Also, in the past a cable connection would not be able to provide the huge leap in quality difference that an HDMI connection can provide compared to composite. Things have changed, yet Sony still decides to be cheapasses.
By that logic, you could argue that and HDTV is an accessory which is needed to get the absolute best experience possible. At $600 why the heck aren't they including an HDTV?! Those cheap bastards!
A HDTV costs WAY more than an HDMI cable, so including a CABLE on such an expensive product should be a no brainer. Also, a HDTV is an actual accessory as it significantly makes using the PS3 a better experience while an HDMI cable is needed to have the PS3 work with a HDTV that may already be owned.
One (the HDTV) enhances the PS3 experience by adding capabilities that are not already present(an accessory), the other (HDMI cable) is needed to USE the PS3 at the high definition level it was designed for and also that most people would prefer to play at if they own an HDTV. If the PS3 comes with a HDMI output being the highest quality output then in my opinion it should include the damn cable that is needed to hook it to a HDMI input. Not doing so is cheapskatish on such an expensive product and I am glad I have already made the decision to get a Wii instead.
Very interesting. I do have to say that while its nice that the PS3 may support any old USB mass storage device as well as wireless adapters, etc, this is a CABLE. Those other accessories actually deserve to be called accessories, but I do not think the HDMI cable, which is needed to get the absolute best experience possible, is an accessory. It is more of a necessity to anyone with a decent video setup and for the price of the PS3 I think a lot of people are going to be pissed off if the HDMI cable is not included.
Actually you're 100% wrong. It's a completely normal HDMI port, look at any picture of it and you'll see that. It also has a normal optical port so whether your taste runs to the $2 monoprice cable or the $6000 Nordost one you'll be able to connect it without giving Sony an extra dime.
You are correct, however while you and I and the rest of the Slashdot readers realize this is the case I would bet the average consumer for the PS3 is not aware that just any cable will work. If Sony releases a cable that is sold right next to the PS3's (I would be very surprised if they did not) then from my experience most people would end up getting that cable since it says Sony on it and appears it is special made for the PS3.
They will probably end up charging a ridiculous price for this "extra" accessory that should be included with the base system and they will probably make a decent amount of money off of it. It is sad they decided not to include the cable that will give the user the best possible experience. Even if the user doesn't currently have a monitor with HDMI input it would still be nice to have the cable ready once a future upgrade is made.
With FreeDOS, you could ship a product without worrying about licencing. Even if Microsoft doesn't REALLY care if you pirate DOS, they might just go after you as a reflex.
Ok, I like this answer. I am not entirely sure using FreeDOS would be as safe as paying less than 20 bucks for MS-DOS, but it still is a good point. Thanks.
I did have periods and even a fancy question mark in there. Just because my sentences are longer than 5 words and you can't follow them due to your ADD doesn't mean the rest of the intelligent Slashdot readers have the same problem as you. Instead of complaining about something that makes no difference you may try to actually contribute thoughts that bear relevance to the topic at hand. You may even get modded up for those type of comments newb.
Don't forget not everyone has Windows. I've run FreeDOS on my Mac in an emulated PC environment to play the good old DOS games.
Ok, so how is Free-DOS any better than Dr. DOS which I have heard is a lot more stable than Free-DOS or even spending less than 20 dollars to get a geniune version of MS-DOS 6.22 and running that in your emulated PC environment? I still see no real gain to using Free-DOS over anything else that is available, especially just getting a copy of the real thing. I see no area that using Free-DOS over MS-DOS is meaningful, Free-DOS has support for long filenames but that is of minimal use to any legacy software that probably wouldn't handle the long filenames anyway.
While this is a cool accomplishment does it serve any real useful purpose? I have had no need for MS-DOS since Windows XP came out since you can create a DOS boot disk easily if you need to and all of my old games that I still like to play every once in a while and old apps run file using the XP compatibility mode. Since I have upgraded to XP I use XP on my machines that I just want to use to play games/web browse/code Windows Apps and Linux on servers and machines I want to code Linux apps on. No MS-DOS needed. If I really wanted to load MS-DOS on a machine and couldn't find my old installer disks then I noticed sealed, brand new copies of version 6.22 can still be bought on eBay like the following: http://cgi.ebay.com/Windows-MS-DOS-6-22-Operating- System-W-Sealed-Floppies_W0QQitemZ260027371141QQih Z016QQcategoryZ11685QQtcZphotoQQssPageNameZWDVWQQr dZ1QQcmdZViewItem
So, while I find the freeDOS project cool in a nerdy sort of way I do not see how the amount of effort that went into it was worth the actual usefullness of the project.
CPU, plus HD, and RAM will NOT be even close to 500 bucks. If that is really all it is missing then I would say it would cost maybe another 300 dollars. You don't have to get the most expensive CPU or fastest RAM or biggest/fastest HD. So for another $300 you can spend a total of $600 and get something that performs just as well, if better, than the $800+ fully configured system.
It is a good starting point, but not a complete solution at $300.
True, it is a starting point. It also is significantly cheaper than the $800+ preconfigured system.
Riiigggght... more like they got busted attempting a money grab and are taking the charge away to save face. I mean what do they think there really are customers who like paying 10,000 extra little fees on top of the advertised "$29.99" or whatever per month. If they really wanted to listen to the customers then they would get rid of all of the additional fees that customers have gotten used to as well.
How many people here hate getting a phone bill and while you signed up for some great deal such as $29.99/month the real charge with all of the extra hidden fees is more like $39.99? That pisses me off to no end and I wish they would eliminate doing that completely but I know the chances of that ever happening are nil.
I would love to know what pointy haired boss thought this was a good idea. I could not even imagine what it would be like to get fired that way, especially since it sounds like most of the people fired were not just retail workers (which would still be wrong) but were employees at the companies headquarters in Fort Worth. I am not one to hold grudges but if any of my employers were ever to do that to me after I had worked for them for years I would forever hate them and I would let them know it. In the article it said that there were meetings prior to the e-mails being sent out that explained they would be notified electronically if they were being laid off but still, that is just plain heartless and gutless. Spend the few minutes it takes and do it in person like it should be done. I hope whoever gave this the OK burns in hell.
AccuBurn-R http://www.infinadyne.com/accuburn-r.html automatically splits up files in a disc layout so you do not manually have to do it yourself and makes it easy to create a multi disc archive. It can be setup to do automatic backups as well. It does not use any proprietary technology to make the spanned disc archive so any of the discs can be easily read and used on almost any computer without the other discs from the archive or any special software. More information on how the disc archives work can be found here http://www.infinadyne.com/accuburn-rtech.html It is not free but it is not too expensive either at $41.99. I do work for Infinadyne but I thought I would mention the product since it is the only burning software to my knowledge that makes it so easy to create a spanned disc archive.
One other thing I must say is that for large backups (> 25GB) I would highly recommend using external hard disks. Slap 2 500 GB drives into 2 external enclosures and rotate doing a full backup to them at least weekly and you should be fine for home backups. If a backup drive goes bad just replace it, if your main drives go bad replace them and restore from your latest backup. Using this system I highly doubt the average home user would ever have major data loss barring fire/flood/etc that takes out the persons home.
By contrast, software is non-rivalrous: me making a copy does not affect the ability of the person who owned the original to make use of it. Please, you and everybody else, learn the difference in order not to look like idiots. Or do you genuinely believe that a sunset will look less beautiful if someone else is looking at it with you, and that your radio will get quieter when someone else switches theirs on?
You are the one who is looking like an idiot. While you making a copy of software that I sell for my livelihood does not affect my ability to still use the software it still would deprive me of the money I should have received from you for your right to have a copy to use. So essentially you would be taking food out of my mouth, thanks. You can preach all day long about how great it would be for all software to be open source and free but that will not change the fact that by copying something that a person solely depends on to make a living is not depriving them of anything.
I think FOSS is great, if I have a small project I am working on in my free time that I think someone else can get some use out of it then I have no problem releasing it to anyone who wishes to use it. On the other hand if I spend 40+ hours a week planning and coding an application that I wish to sell then it damn well does belong to me and you have no right whatsoever to copy it at your own will. If you don't agree with my line of thinking then don't buy or use my software, you may find a FOSS version that is similar but for a lot of applications (especially specialized ones) closed source versions are superior hands down and the money paid is worth the quality of the product as well as the support received.
Put down the pipe and come back to the real world buddy.
The quality nowadays SUCKS. They seem to all be cheap, plastic pieces of shit that you must replace after a year when some tiny plastic piece inside breaks and is unrepairable. The ink also is a pain in the ass unless you do a whole lot of printing because if it sits for too long (in my experience a month or two) it dries up. The last ink jet I had was a canon and it went bad about 4 years ago and I replaced it with a used BW laser printer since most of my printing does not use color anyway. I am still using the same toner catridge that came with it 4 years ago and have not had a problem at all. I am probably going to upgrade to a used color laser printer soon since it would be nice to have the option of color and a used color laser printer can be had for not too high of a price. I will DEFINITELY NOT be going back to a color ink jet however.
I think the majority of people are soon just going to get sick of the shitty quality of the ink jets and paying the astronomical ink prices and they will look elsewhere too. I think in the next couple of years the only way ink jets will get into the market are when they are bundled with new computers and purchased by poor souls who don't know any better and havent experienced the poor quality yet.
I have never heard an album that I liked each and every single song on it
I would agree that for most albums I don't like every song on them but I can think of a few off the top of my head that I do truly like every song:
1) O.A.R. - The Wanderer and Risen 2) Green Day - Dookie 3) Korn - Korn 4) AC/DC - Back in Black 5) Linkin Park - Meteora
I could list a few more too. They are rare but there definitely exist some albums that at least for my taste in music I enjoy every song.
If I limited my music buying only to albums that don't have any song I don't like, then I wouldn't buy any music at all.
It is good to hear that you don't limit yourself in that respect. I hate filler as much as most people but as long as I like at least half of the songs on a disc I will usually buy it. Like people have mentioned before, being able to purchase individual songs online is great for those times when you only want 1-2 songs from an album. For bands such as above that have given me great discs in the past I will usually purchase new discs without testing out every song, this has turned out to work pretty well and even if some albums disappoint me (O.A.R. Stories of a Stranger for example) I don't feel so bad since I am still supporting a band that has given me a lot of entertainment.
Am I the only one that thinks digital projectors could leave both these technologies in the dust? I know there are some drawbacks (high cost, bulb life), but as far as the big-screen pissing contest goes digital projectors are untouchable.
I completely agree with you. Around 1.5 years ago I decided I wanted to upgrade from my 24 inch TV that I used all through college and I looked into plasmas, LCD TV's, and projectors. The projectors just could not be beat for my needs. I got an Infocus SP4805 and I have loved it. It is light weight (~6 pounds) which is nice since I will be moving every once in a while, it has an EXCELLENT picture, and it only cost about $1500 at the time which was cheaper than any of the other 2 types of tech I was looking into.
All of my friends and family who have come over to check out my HT setup have said they will be making a projector purchase the next time they upgrade their own HT's. 3 years ago my father bought a 65 inch HDTV Toshiba and he even said the quality of my projector was excellent and he wants to get one soon.
Sure, paying ~$300.00 for a replacement lamp seems steep, but considering I can get around 4000 hours of life out of one bulb that is only about 7 1/2 cents per hour, very reasonable to me and I can purchase at least 2 more lamps before I approach the total prices I would have paid for a plasma/LCD TV that was big enough for my tastes.
If you have a room that the light can be relatively easily controlled (or you do most of your movie/TV viewing at night like me) then in my opinion a projector is nearly impossible to top. They have it all and do it in a much smaller package than anything else that is available.
Slashdot Mirror
The numbers look large given that Firefox is supposed to be the superior browser
Opera is the superior browser at the moment performance/standards compliant wise.
Think Gates & Co. would care to give up the source code to do a head-to-head comparison?
Of course they wouldn't, but I would love to see a comparison against Opera.
I wouldn't trust those numbers from thecounter.com or any of the other sites that depend on user agent. Opera user here and I know for a fact that most of the time I have my user agent set to MSIE 6.0 otherwise a lot of sites give me problems and won't let me load them even though they render just fine. Those same sites a lot of times will load without a problem in firefox, when will web designers stop checking the damn user agent, it is a waste of time and just pisses people off. It has been getting better but still any analysis done that relies solely on user agent is not reliable in my book. I also would really love to have a true way to find out how close that 1% for Opera is to correct because I doubt it is correct.
How many users regard their frequent crashes as normal operation for a PC?
Since I have been using XP I do not regard frequent crashes as a normal operation and everytime it has occured it was due to hardware such as bad RAM. XP has been rock solid in my experience, I actually have only had to reinstall the whole OS once since I first installed it when it was released 5 years ago, and the reason I had to reinstall was because the hard disk I had it on went bad. As long as you have half a brain and take reasonable security precautions there is no reason that anybody could not have the same experience that I have had.
You will probably get modded up for being a MS basher even though not all of what you say is true. Sure, not everything they make works great or is brilliantly designed but I do not think that is a result of them specifically planning it that way which is what you seemed to be saying. They have come a long way in the last few years and occurances such as daily crashes are a thing of the past, so people need to stop bringing them up.
No, just THE ONLY OTHER CONSOLE THAT DOES HD
_ id=4103879#Features+%26+Specifications includes component cables which allows HD, I cannot find anything on Sony's website http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/about.html that says it will even include those cables. Also, there does not yet exist an HDMI cable for the 360 so it is not even an option while for the PS3 since it is a normal HDMI output they can easily include an HDMI cable. Another big difference is the the PS3 premium system is TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS more than the XBox 360 premium bundle, for that much of a price difference they should include the god damn cable. Cables are not expensive to make, but stores (and console makers) love to charge a shitload for them.
The XBox 360 Premium http://www.walmart.com/catalog/product.do?product
So you fail this argument, the 360 includes the best cable that is available while the PS3 doesn't.
Any box that doesn't run Windows confuses most investigators.
. asp and since they work and have been well tested on Windows it makes little sense to increase the likelyhood of problems by porting these applications to other OS's. The other big reason most tools are Windows centric is obviously because Windows is the most widely used OS and people like to use what they already have and know.
You are far from correct. A lot of forensic investigators I have talked to actually use linux at times to do things such as image drives which is safer to do on linux than Windows and they are not straight Windows users.
Yep, all their tools are Windows-specific.
The reason they do use Windows tools most of the time is because the tried and true forensic applications are developed for Windows such as Forensic Toolkit Pro http://www.accessdata.com/products/ftk/ and EnCase http://www.guidancesoftware.com/products/ef_index
Windows may not be the greatest OS, and I know people love to bash it, but that does not mean the Windows tools developed for forensic investigations are of low quality. I work as a software developer in this field so I have a decent view on what the situation is and your comment was way far off.
it makes no sense to raise the cost for everyone else to subsidize the cost for people who can probably better afford the cables anyway.
t are the same exact thing. I think you mean component cables http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Component_Video and all that a full component cable consists of is 3 RCA cables. Not including a component cable would not be a problem for about 90% of the people I know since they have RCA cables laying all over the place since they come with just about any VCR, DVD player, audio system, video console etc.
Raising the cost is not needed, the PS3 is already priced at $600, I think some cables can be added for a price that is already high already.
Could they not be including it because HDMI is a feature maybe 10% of the market will actually be able to use? Or given the fact that even though early adopters are more likely to *have* HDTVs, when they're in for a penny they're in for a pound, the marginal price increase for the top of the line input isn't going to scare anyone who already intends to buy one away.
I know it isn't going to scare people away, all that I am saying is the only reason they are not including them is because they want to have a bigger profit. I am saying this not something that should be cut out since it needed to get the highest level of quality out of the machine, a machine that is being marketed for its high definition ability. Being able to get that ability straight out of the box is something that in my opinion is a requirement. The HDMI cable is not an accessory, it is very necessary and they decided they can leave it out and make more profit instead which is shitty in my eyes for a SIX HUNDRED DOLLAR PRODUCT.
In the PS2/XBOX generation, and every console before that, RCA cables have been standard - composite cables sold for $30. The Xbox 360 Premium pack has composite built in, but the Core only has RCAs.
RCA cables http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rca_cable and composite cables http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composite_video_inpu
The average user doesn't need an HDMI cable.
The average user will not spend $600 on a console either. The average user also doesn't care about high definition gaming (which this console is aimed at providing).
Consoles have always shipped with the most common, and basic, cable solution available.
Most consoles also didn't brag about how they can provide the best picture/graphics possible and then not provide that capability straight out of the box. Also, in the past a cable connection would not be able to provide the huge leap in quality difference that an HDMI connection can provide compared to composite. Things have changed, yet Sony still decides to be cheapasses.
By that logic, you could argue that and HDTV is an accessory which is needed to get the absolute best experience possible. At $600 why the heck aren't they including an HDTV?! Those cheap bastards!
A HDTV costs WAY more than an HDMI cable, so including a CABLE on such an expensive product should be a no brainer. Also, a HDTV is an actual accessory as it significantly makes using the PS3 a better experience while an HDMI cable is needed to have the PS3 work with a HDTV that may already be owned.
One (the HDTV) enhances the PS3 experience by adding capabilities that are not already present(an accessory), the other (HDMI cable) is needed to USE the PS3 at the high definition level it was designed for and also that most people would prefer to play at if they own an HDTV. If the PS3 comes with a HDMI output being the highest quality output then in my opinion it should include the damn cable that is needed to hook it to a HDMI input. Not doing so is cheapskatish on such an expensive product and I am glad I have already made the decision to get a Wii instead.
Very interesting. I do have to say that while its nice that the PS3 may support any old USB mass storage device as well as wireless adapters, etc, this is a CABLE. Those other accessories actually deserve to be called accessories, but I do not think the HDMI cable, which is needed to get the absolute best experience possible, is an accessory. It is more of a necessity to anyone with a decent video setup and for the price of the PS3 I think a lot of people are going to be pissed off if the HDMI cable is not included.
Actually you're 100% wrong. It's a completely normal HDMI port, look at any picture of it and you'll see that. It also has a normal optical port so whether your taste runs to the $2 monoprice cable or the $6000 Nordost one you'll be able to connect it without giving Sony an extra dime.
You are correct, however while you and I and the rest of the Slashdot readers realize this is the case I would bet the average consumer for the PS3 is not aware that just any cable will work. If Sony releases a cable that is sold right next to the PS3's (I would be very surprised if they did not) then from my experience most people would end up getting that cable since it says Sony on it and appears it is special made for the PS3.
They will probably end up charging a ridiculous price for this "extra" accessory that should be included with the base system and they will probably make a decent amount of money off of it. It is sad they decided not to include the cable that will give the user the best possible experience. Even if the user doesn't currently have a monitor with HDMI input it would still be nice to have the cable ready once a future upgrade is made.
With FreeDOS, you could ship a product without worrying about licencing. Even if Microsoft doesn't REALLY care if you pirate DOS, they might just go after you as a reflex.
Ok, I like this answer. I am not entirely sure using FreeDOS would be as safe as paying less than 20 bucks for MS-DOS, but it still is a good point. Thanks.
I did have periods and even a fancy question mark in there. Just because my sentences are longer than 5 words and you can't follow them due to your ADD doesn't mean the rest of the intelligent Slashdot readers have the same problem as you. Instead of complaining about something that makes no difference you may try to actually contribute thoughts that bear relevance to the topic at hand. You may even get modded up for those type of comments newb.
Don't forget not everyone has Windows. I've run FreeDOS on my Mac in an emulated PC environment to play the good old DOS games.
Ok, so how is Free-DOS any better than Dr. DOS which I have heard is a lot more stable than Free-DOS or even spending less than 20 dollars to get a geniune version of MS-DOS 6.22 and running that in your emulated PC environment? I still see no real gain to using Free-DOS over anything else that is available, especially just getting a copy of the real thing. I see no area that using Free-DOS over MS-DOS is meaningful, Free-DOS has support for long filenames but that is of minimal use to any legacy software that probably wouldn't handle the long filenames anyway.
While this is a cool accomplishment does it serve any real useful purpose? I have had no need for MS-DOS since Windows XP came out since you can create a DOS boot disk easily if you need to and all of my old games that I still like to play every once in a while and old apps run file using the XP compatibility mode. Since I have upgraded to XP I use XP on my machines that I just want to use to play games/web browse/code Windows Apps and Linux on servers and machines I want to code Linux apps on. No MS-DOS needed. If I really wanted to load MS-DOS on a machine and couldn't find my old installer disks then I noticed sealed, brand new copies of version 6.22 can still be bought on eBay like the following: http://cgi.ebay.com/Windows-MS-DOS-6-22-Operating- System-W-Sealed-Floppies_W0QQitemZ260027371141QQih Z016QQcategoryZ11685QQtcZphotoQQssPageNameZWDVWQQr dZ1QQcmdZViewItem
So, while I find the freeDOS project cool in a nerdy sort of way I do not see how the amount of effort that went into it was worth the actual usefullness of the project.
CPU, plus HD, and RAM will NOT be even close to 500 bucks. If that is really all it is missing then I would say it would cost maybe another 300 dollars. You don't have to get the most expensive CPU or fastest RAM or biggest/fastest HD. So for another $300 you can spend a total of $600 and get something that performs just as well, if better, than the $800+ fully configured system.
It is a good starting point, but not a complete solution at $300.
True, it is a starting point. It also is significantly cheaper than the $800+ preconfigured system.
Riiigggght... more like they got busted attempting a money grab and are taking the charge away to save face. I mean what do they think there really are customers who like paying 10,000 extra little fees on top of the advertised "$29.99" or whatever per month. If they really wanted to listen to the customers then they would get rid of all of the additional fees that customers have gotten used to as well.
How many people here hate getting a phone bill and while you signed up for some great deal such as $29.99/month the real charge with all of the extra hidden fees is more like $39.99? That pisses me off to no end and I wish they would eliminate doing that completely but I know the chances of that ever happening are nil.
but it also happens on my home desktop, where the drives are faster and there's 640GB of RAM, which ought to be enough for anybody.
:-)
Whoa, you have 640 GB of RAM! I am jealous!
I would love to know what pointy haired boss thought this was a good idea. I could not even imagine what it would be like to get fired that way, especially since it sounds like most of the people fired were not just retail workers (which would still be wrong) but were employees at the companies headquarters in Fort Worth. I am not one to hold grudges but if any of my employers were ever to do that to me after I had worked for them for years I would forever hate them and I would let them know it. In the article it said that there were meetings prior to the e-mails being sent out that explained they would be notified electronically if they were being laid off but still, that is just plain heartless and gutless. Spend the few minutes it takes and do it in person like it should be done. I hope whoever gave this the OK burns in hell.
AccuBurn-R http://www.infinadyne.com/accuburn-r.html automatically splits up files in a disc layout so you do not manually have to do it yourself and makes it easy to create a multi disc archive. It can be setup to do automatic backups as well. It does not use any proprietary technology to make the spanned disc archive so any of the discs can be easily read and used on almost any computer without the other discs from the archive or any special software. More information on how the disc archives work can be found here http://www.infinadyne.com/accuburn-rtech.html It is not free but it is not too expensive either at $41.99. I do work for Infinadyne but I thought I would mention the product since it is the only burning software to my knowledge that makes it so easy to create a spanned disc archive.
One other thing I must say is that for large backups (> 25GB) I would highly recommend using external hard disks. Slap 2 500 GB drives into 2 external enclosures and rotate doing a full backup to them at least weekly and you should be fine for home backups. If a backup drive goes bad just replace it, if your main drives go bad replace them and restore from your latest backup. Using this system I highly doubt the average home user would ever have major data loss barring fire/flood/etc that takes out the persons home.
By contrast, software is non-rivalrous: me making a copy does not affect the ability of the person who owned the original to make use of it. Please, you and everybody else, learn the difference in order not to look like idiots. Or do you genuinely believe that a sunset will look less beautiful if someone else is looking at it with you, and that your radio will get quieter when someone else switches theirs on?
You are the one who is looking like an idiot. While you making a copy of software that I sell for my livelihood does not affect my ability to still use the software it still would deprive me of the money I should have received from you for your right to have a copy to use. So essentially you would be taking food out of my mouth, thanks. You can preach all day long about how great it would be for all software to be open source and free but that will not change the fact that by copying something that a person solely depends on to make a living is not depriving them of anything.
I think FOSS is great, if I have a small project I am working on in my free time that I think someone else can get some use out of it then I have no problem releasing it to anyone who wishes to use it. On the other hand if I spend 40+ hours a week planning and coding an application that I wish to sell then it damn well does belong to me and you have no right whatsoever to copy it at your own will. If you don't agree with my line of thinking then don't buy or use my software, you may find a FOSS version that is similar but for a lot of applications (especially specialized ones) closed source versions are superior hands down and the money paid is worth the quality of the product as well as the support received.
Put down the pipe and come back to the real world buddy.
The quality nowadays SUCKS. They seem to all be cheap, plastic pieces of shit that you must replace after a year when some tiny plastic piece inside breaks and is unrepairable. The ink also is a pain in the ass unless you do a whole lot of printing because if it sits for too long (in my experience a month or two) it dries up. The last ink jet I had was a canon and it went bad about 4 years ago and I replaced it with a used BW laser printer since most of my printing does not use color anyway. I am still using the same toner catridge that came with it 4 years ago and have not had a problem at all. I am probably going to upgrade to a used color laser printer soon since it would be nice to have the option of color and a used color laser printer can be had for not too high of a price. I will DEFINITELY NOT be going back to a color ink jet however.
I think the majority of people are soon just going to get sick of the shitty quality of the ink jets and paying the astronomical ink prices and they will look elsewhere too. I think in the next couple of years the only way ink jets will get into the market are when they are bundled with new computers and purchased by poor souls who don't know any better and havent experienced the poor quality yet.
And who cares what the tempature of the water that is flushing your last piss and/or shit is? Must be a European thing...
I see your redback and raise you a redneck... actually, I'm gonna raise a hundred rednecks, yargh har! My own redneck zombie army!!!
wouldn't that be the KKK?
I have never heard an album that I liked each and every single song on it
I would agree that for most albums I don't like every song on them but I can think of a few off the top of my head that I do truly like every song:
1) O.A.R. - The Wanderer and Risen
2) Green Day - Dookie
3) Korn - Korn
4) AC/DC - Back in Black
5) Linkin Park - Meteora
I could list a few more too. They are rare but there definitely exist some albums that at least for my taste in music I enjoy every song.
If I limited my music buying only to albums that don't have any song I don't like, then I wouldn't buy any music at all.
It is good to hear that you don't limit yourself in that respect. I hate filler as much as most people but as long as I like at least half of the songs on a disc I will usually buy it. Like people have mentioned before, being able to purchase individual songs online is great for those times when you only want 1-2 songs from an album. For bands such as above that have given me great discs in the past I will usually purchase new discs without testing out every song, this has turned out to work pretty well and even if some albums disappoint me (O.A.R. Stories of a Stranger for example) I don't feel so bad since I am still supporting a band that has given me a lot of entertainment.
Am I the only one that thinks digital projectors could leave both these technologies in the dust? I know there are some drawbacks (high cost, bulb life), but as far as the big-screen pissing contest goes digital projectors are untouchable.
I completely agree with you. Around 1.5 years ago I decided I wanted to upgrade from my 24 inch TV that I used all through college and I looked into plasmas, LCD TV's, and projectors. The projectors just could not be beat for my needs. I got an Infocus SP4805 and I have loved it. It is light weight (~6 pounds) which is nice since I will be moving every once in a while, it has an EXCELLENT picture, and it only cost about $1500 at the time which was cheaper than any of the other 2 types of tech I was looking into.
All of my friends and family who have come over to check out my HT setup have said they will be making a projector purchase the next time they upgrade their own HT's. 3 years ago my father bought a 65 inch HDTV Toshiba and he even said the quality of my projector was excellent and he wants to get one soon.
Sure, paying ~$300.00 for a replacement lamp seems steep, but considering I can get around 4000 hours of life out of one bulb that is only about 7 1/2 cents per hour, very reasonable to me and I can purchase at least 2 more lamps before I approach the total prices I would have paid for a plasma/LCD TV that was big enough for my tastes.
If you have a room that the light can be relatively easily controlled (or you do most of your movie/TV viewing at night like me) then in my opinion a projector is nearly impossible to top. They have it all and do it in a much smaller package than anything else that is available.