I'd be willing to spend time working on the project. In fact, I'd be willing to spend time on the UI, specifically.
From the HW/SW/Interface side, it is quite apparent (and hopefully obvious) that modularity is the key. This allows a 'simple' frame box to be sold, and upgraded with the parts the user wants. It also means that going from Technology 1.0 to Technology 2.0 is less painful.
This allows some legal issues to be skirted (since they can plug in modules from third parties to do special 'tricks'), and heavily follows the PC hardware model (company A provides the frame, but companies C, D, E provide components).
There's just something RIGHT about all this, even if Commander Taco's message goes too far.:)
In 1997, I wrote a Perspective article for C-Net. Particularly, quoting from a Forrester research article, "These ISPs are now facing a shakeout that could lead to a consolidation of up to 90 percent of all of today's ISP businesses over the next five years, the research firm predicts. And guess who's going to get it? It's not the little guys."
This was in response from another article in 1997 predicting a majory industry consolidation. The small ISPs were going to be gobbled up, they claimed. Well, there was a bit of truth of both sides.
What do I recommend? Go with a regional ISP of moderate size. They're not going to have a silly dot-com based business model (let's grab market share and throw money to the wind) and they're not going to be small enough to run themselves into the ground (how do we run a business, again?).
The price will probably be on-par, and you stand a better chance of getting better service.
I'm told (was it from reading the package) that when you turn the camera in, the components of the camera are 'recycled' into making new ones. I certainly don't know the process, but it makes sense if some of the components have a good price/weight (for shipping) ratio.
Never tried reusing one, though. Sounds like a simple project to tinker around with.
First, I wanted to give a big gratz on this case. I was rooting for you, but at the same time, given the information of what was presented in court, I'm awfully confused to see how you ended up winning the case. The statements brought up in court seemed to support Kozmo more than the plantiff.
I've been thinking of what Spamford Wallace says lately, about how there are people out there who actually LOVE spam! I have to wonder... does anyone know someone who has a "Season Pass" on their TiVo for "Paid Programming" ??
...has a great quote: "The consumer is going to eat what he's given."
This is obvious bait, Michael, so I'll take it. A statement, such as the one above, is exactly the kind of thing you'd expect from a monopoly. The customer is going to have to settle with whatever we want? What kind of business practice is that in a normal market?
The correct answer, Microsoft, is that the consumer will get whatever he demands. This, and the active registration, is further proof that what the consumer wants does not matter to Microsoft. It is what THEY want.
Not a programmer, but I know of a blind systems administrator who works at Williams. His workstation is interesting. No monitor, but a text-to-speech module. Over the years, he's managed to crank up the rate at which he can hear the output. Today, you couldn't make heads or tails of what the thing is saying to him, but it makes perfect sense to him! (And yes, he works with the hardware, handles network connections, and more. Amazing.)
A simple Google search should be enough to convince any judge that the trademarked phrases have been hopelessly diluted and absorbed into mainstream culture. It is far too late for Mastercard to go around trying to protect their trademark.
What do I recommend?
Kleenex : $2
Watching a major corporation engage in a humorous campaign of self destruction: Priceless.
I'm wondering with all the talk of motors and the like... is it bad to hook your fish tank's air pump (and possibly filters) up to a UPS? If the air pump and filters are off for any length of time, the least robust fish tend to suffer oxygen starvation and die. I just want to know I'm not nuking the little motor.
P2P lives, not because of it being a cool technology, but because it brings to realization an important fact. There are a number of niches where the audience, or the users, are the best content.
I'll take the broad definition of "peer-to-peer" here and say that in the realm of things that are legal, P2P has the most impact in the following areas:
In the idea space, when the consumer voice is just as important, or more important than a singular voice. For example, product review sites like Epinions. A mass of users can provide far more information on a wider variety of topics than Consumer Reports can.
In hobbies, where there isn't profitability in commercialization. For example, KLOV, the Killer List of Arcade Games. You've got a large number of enthusiastic collectors who are documenting information about games that have long since lost any commercial value.
In dark legal areas, where a commercial entity cannoy provide what the audience wants. MP3s are the best example. There isn't a place (commercial or not) to go to get your MP3s. Peer to peer is the place to go.
In short, peer-to-peer fills in the gaps where commercial organizations do not exist, can not exist, or do their job poorly. And because that is always going to exist, so will peer-to-peer.
I clicked on your URL. And actually, I was thankfully surprised. It didn't require that you already have a Microsoft Passport account in order to read the Terms of Use. Isn't that downright friendly of them?
Yes. PayMyBills has "upgraded" me *two times* now since they were taken over by PayTrust. The first "upgrade" was to take away the system where they wrote their own checks on my behalf (instead of simply printing checks with my name and account number). Now when a check gets to its destination, it may bounce. And it doesn't shield my account number like their semi-money order did.
The next upgrade was to charge me for my account that had one year of free service left. Oh, and also to "upgrade" me to a plan that charges on a per "transaction" basis (which the "transaction" was upgraded to mean a bill received or a payment sent).
I'd reverse your question and answer what you should be looking for. If we're talking college recruitment, your best bet is probably to sign on with a large, well known company. Looks great on the resume, and typically, very large companies won't stick a grunt like you with a non-compete unless you're getting into something pretty strange. (BTW: Companies aren't in the habit of giving their intellectual property and non-compete forms up front. They wait until you've committed, to make it less painful to back out.)
What do you end up with? A very nice company name on your resume. I agree with the other poster. Expect to leave your first job after a year and a half. Chances are, you're going to be unhappy with the page, and based on common knowledge (and a recent SAGE survey), pay increases in IT happen by switching to another company -- not doing an excellent job for the company you are working for.
Of course, you should take your first job seriously, but if it isn't the "perfect" company, that's fine. In fact, its probably better if your first job isn't a place you'd like to stay. Hurts your pay and your resume.
Showbiz pizza purchased Chuck E. Cheese (which was either partially or fully owned by Noland Bushnell, of Atari fame). The mouse was embraced and extended into the Showbiz Pizza family.
It is a pleasant surprise that they are still around. Too bad they haven't upgrading the animitronics.
Earlier, I said that that the arcade games currently stand out only as 'glorified amusement park rides'. Your post reminded me that it isn't entirely the case.
The other two categories are redemption games (put in $.25, get three tickets, you're 1/10th of the way to a plastic ring), and gambling machines (ala Video Poker and Video Slots).
How the mighty have fallen. Atari certainly was a market leader, was it not? They were the first to market with a number of neat things, and one of the first to disappear (first the home games and computing divisions, then the coin-op branch).
The classic 'arcade' is pretty much gone. This will continue unless the arcade game manufacturers (which are actually the home video game publishers) decide that the arcade actually qualifies as a form of 'advertisement', and decides to subsidize the cost of arcade games.
If home arcade games are just as good as the home versions, then the only reason (aside from nostalga) to go to an arcade is to see the latest stuff before they are released as home versions.
Your avid arcade game collector knows that the arcade industry has been on the decline since 1984. A number of reasons have been given. The main reason seems to have been a glut of copy-cat games and an end of originality in the arcades. (This was briefly broken by the Street Fighter genre. Briefly, mind you.)
Modern arcade games seem to be a kind of advertisement for the home game. I obtained a Killer Instinct PCB a year ago, only to be bombarded with a intro screen announcing it would be available for the "Nintendo ULTRA 64". Probably one of the most blatent examples.
Then, there's the glorified amusement park rides. Either your racing games, or your motorized/pnumatic/hydrolic controlled simulator type of environment. That's about the only way an arcade game can differentiate itself from the home game.
At the start of the arcade business, that was not true. The "home version" was pale in comparison to the arcade original. The arcade showcased the latest in technology, which was years away from what was available in the home.
Today, the situation is quite difference. In fact, the X-Box seems to put the final nail in the coffin. Arcade game manufacturers may very well stop creating arcade games on custom hardware. Instead, they'll compile for an X-Box style platform. Why? For the ease of conversion to the home game. That's where the money is. The arcade game is just the 'advertisement' to create the buzz.
Sega once made an unsuccessful attempt at something similar. Remeber the Sega Saturn? Well, it has its arcade counterpart, the Sega Titan hardware, which a number of games were based off of (example: Die Hard Arcade, Batman, Winter Heat). But it failed to catch firew, and a small number of games were targeted to the Titan platform (which had an easy route to make the games work on the Saturn).
It is very likely, however, that Microsoft is going to win where Sega failed. The X-Box is a 'sure thing' platform. Create your arcade games for the X-Box platform, and you'll have an easy route to make a home version.
What arcade collectors may not realize at this point, is that if Microsoft pull things off right, the existing arcade standard, JAMMA, could go the way of the vector game, into arcade history. X-Box could very well become the next arcade standard -- and home platform standard.
I'm not looking forward to it, myself. But I'm willing to believe that home and arcade game manufacturers are. Of course, Microsoft seems to have a habit of getting version 1.0 of everything wrong. But with no real competition, I think it puts a nail in the coffin of the arcade industry as we know it today.
I'm actually rather disappointed at the discussion so far. I figured I'd see something a little more lively than this. Here's part of what I know:
The SPARC64-GP is significantly faster than the UltraSPARC II at the same clock rates. Yes, the particular web site referencing the SPARC64-GP is old, but the architectual improvements over the USII are the same, and the clock rates have increased.
Of course, the answer is that "UltraSPARC III" is just around the corner. But Fujitsu isn't standing still, and is working on processors and platforms of their own. What I *hope* we're looking at is an Intel/AMD leapfrog kind of competition where we've got some real competition on performance and price.
One area that I've been told that Fujitsu isn't all that hot on (but they are working on the issue) is support/service. They're not quite at the helpdesk level. But I know locally that AMDAHL has been training people to support their new Sun hardware.
Personally, I invited Fujitsu to give our site a presentation next week. I'm anxious to see what kind of things they have to offer. Its apparent that they CURRENTLY have something that can compete with the Sun line in price and performance... from the E220 to the E10k level. I have heard good things about the stability of the solutions that they offer.
I think it is important that Fujitsu starts marketing themselves to Sun shops and giving them an idea of where they are going. I want to see the concentrating on the support side harder. I think I'd be a little scared to run a 64-way box (with domains) connected to EMC via Jaycor fiber cards, and running an Oracle database. If they had a hardcore service division, I wouldn't be so scared.
Second, in their article, they made a very good point. For almost all tasks, you're going to be better off INCREASING the amount of SDRAM you have in your system, versus upgrading to DDRAM. Why? Because with the extra RAM, you're going to be caching more and you're going to be churning your hard drive a whole lot less. And if you think SDRAM is slow, in comparitive terms, getting data off of the hard drive is like watching glass melt at room temperature. (Note: It does happen. Just VERY VERY slowly.)
So, if you are UPGRADING a system, you're going to be better off with more memory rather than going DDRAM. Way more bang for the buck, unless you've got a major specific thing you work with that you know that DDRAM is somehow going to give a big advantage (rare).
I was also reading a bit about the future of memory. It seems that there are things coming down the pipe, that by the time you want to upgrade your NEW system, you probably won't be using your current SDRAM or DDRAM modules. So it almost makes sense to keep with your current memory modules and get more life out of them. Or at least to spend your money on MORE memory, rather than FASTER memory. (Which MORE memory will equal FASTER performance, even if you don't have the fastest memory around.)
I've been heavily researching this issue, lately, going from hardware site to hardware site. A summary of what I have found is as follows:
A 133mhz front side bus is significantly better than a 100mhz front side bus.
There is almost no performance difference between CAS 2.5 and CAS 2 memory.
On the Athlon, the choice between DDR and SDR RAM makes little difference in terms of performance, except in unusual circumstances.
In order to better answer the question, we have to know what you're doing with the machine.
For example, will you be playing one of the first person shooters where the graphics card is traditionally the bottleneck? If so, your answer is obvious -- don't DDR. But if you're playing some of the others where memory transfer rates are important, and performance in that game is important to you, the DDR is a good bet.
For a "general task" computer running Windows, SDR is fine. BTW, none of the benchmarks I've seen consider how a Linux OS would respond. Interesting, no?
Yahoo's problem is they've diversified WAY beyond their core business. They want to be AOL, in a way. More diversification costs them more and more money, with the payback reaching beyond 2020. Assuming there isn't a disruptive technology that they can't deal with, they'll probably make it.
The best summary of this is that "The Database IS the Business". It all depends on how much the integrity of the database is worth to you. It also depends on how well you want to scale up the business. And I'm not *just* talking about the database, but the level of support, and the personel who are trained and *qualified* to manage your data.
It's kind of funny to say it this way, but I'd have to wonder what the correlation is between successful businesses, and commercial databases.
At the big business side, an open source database isn't even a consideration. Its at the low-end of the scale that it is. And the single driver for going with an open source database doesn't *seem* to be reliability, cost, or 'openness'. (Do you want your people modifying how the database's internal code works?) Its about dollars. Businesses with dollars will (with rare exceptions) choose a commercial and well-trusted database.
In fact, it sounds dangerous to set up a business there until the way the court works and makes judgements has been set down and proven out. By setting up there, a business has a strange liability that is unknown.
Hmmm, let's extrapolate from the past: white male starship captain, older starship captain, black starship captain, woman starship captain... I figure the next one up will be an older, woman black starship captain. Probably not bald, but we can't be sure.
Nope! Either the captain will be a very compelling non-human, or it'll be a gay Arab man with a superintelligent pet that gets the crew past the more sticky situations.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be willing to spend time working on the project. In fact, I'd be willing to spend time on the UI, specifically.
:)
From the HW/SW/Interface side, it is quite apparent (and hopefully obvious) that modularity is the key. This allows a 'simple' frame box to be sold, and upgraded with the parts the user wants. It also means that going from Technology 1.0 to Technology 2.0 is less painful.
This allows some legal issues to be skirted (since they can plug in modules from third parties to do special 'tricks'), and heavily follows the PC hardware model (company A provides the frame, but companies C, D, E provide components).
There's just something RIGHT about all this, even if Commander Taco's message goes too far.
This was in response from another article in 1997 predicting a majory industry consolidation. The small ISPs were going to be gobbled up, they claimed. Well, there was a bit of truth of both sides.
What do I recommend? Go with a regional ISP of moderate size. They're not going to have a silly dot-com based business model (let's grab market share and throw money to the wind) and they're not going to be small enough to run themselves into the ground (how do we run a business, again?). The price will probably be on-par, and you stand a better chance of getting better service.
I'm told (was it from reading the package) that when you turn the camera in, the components of the camera are 'recycled' into making new ones. I certainly don't know the process, but it makes sense if some of the components have a good price/weight (for shipping) ratio.
Never tried reusing one, though. Sounds like a simple project to tinker around with.
First, I wanted to give a big gratz on this case. I was rooting for you, but at the same time, given the information of what was presented in court, I'm awfully confused to see how you ended up winning the case. The statements brought up in court seemed to support Kozmo more than the plantiff.
I've been thinking of what Spamford Wallace says lately, about how there are people out there who actually LOVE spam! I have to wonder... does anyone know someone who has a "Season Pass" on their TiVo for "Paid Programming" ??
This is obvious bait, Michael, so I'll take it. A statement, such as the one above, is exactly the kind of thing you'd expect from a monopoly. The customer is going to have to settle with whatever we want? What kind of business practice is that in a normal market?
The correct answer, Microsoft, is that the consumer will get whatever he demands. This, and the active registration, is further proof that what the consumer wants does not matter to Microsoft. It is what THEY want.
Not a programmer, but I know of a blind systems administrator who works at Williams. His workstation is interesting. No monitor, but a text-to-speech module. Over the years, he's managed to crank up the rate at which he can hear the output. Today, you couldn't make heads or tails of what the thing is saying to him, but it makes perfect sense to him! (And yes, he works with the hardware, handles network connections, and more. Amazing.)
A simple Google search should be enough to convince any judge that the trademarked phrases have been hopelessly diluted and absorbed into mainstream culture. It is far too late for Mastercard to go around trying to protect their trademark.
What do I recommend?
Kleenex : $2
Watching a major corporation engage in a humorous campaign of self destruction: Priceless.
I'm wondering with all the talk of motors and the like... is it bad to hook your fish tank's air pump (and possibly filters) up to a UPS? If the air pump and filters are off for any length of time, the least robust fish tend to suffer oxygen starvation and die. I just want to know I'm not nuking the little motor.
P2P lives, not because of it being a cool technology, but because it brings to realization an important fact. There are a number of niches where the audience, or the users, are the best content.
I'll take the broad definition of "peer-to-peer" here and say that in the realm of things that are legal, P2P has the most impact in the following areas:
In the idea space, when the consumer voice is just as important, or more important than a singular voice. For example, product review sites like Epinions. A mass of users can provide far more information on a wider variety of topics than Consumer Reports can.
In hobbies, where there isn't profitability in commercialization. For example, KLOV, the Killer List of Arcade Games. You've got a large number of enthusiastic collectors who are documenting information about games that have long since lost any commercial value.
In dark legal areas, where a commercial entity cannoy provide what the audience wants. MP3s are the best example. There isn't a place (commercial or not) to go to get your MP3s. Peer to peer is the place to go.
In short, peer-to-peer fills in the gaps where commercial organizations do not exist, can not exist, or do their job poorly. And because that is always going to exist, so will peer-to-peer.
You are associated with UD? Might have been an interesting fact to point out.
I clicked on your URL. And actually, I was thankfully surprised. It didn't require that you already have a Microsoft Passport account in order to read the Terms of Use. Isn't that downright friendly of them?
Yes. PayMyBills has "upgraded" me *two times* now since they were taken over by PayTrust. The first "upgrade" was to take away the system where they wrote their own checks on my behalf (instead of simply printing checks with my name and account number). Now when a check gets to its destination, it may bounce. And it doesn't shield my account number like their semi-money order did.
The next upgrade was to charge me for my account that had one year of free service left. Oh, and also to "upgrade" me to a plan that charges on a per "transaction" basis (which the "transaction" was upgraded to mean a bill received or a payment sent).
I just LOVE these upgrades.
I'd reverse your question and answer what you should be looking for. If we're talking college recruitment, your best bet is probably to sign on with a large, well known company. Looks great on the resume, and typically, very large companies won't stick a grunt like you with a non-compete unless you're getting into something pretty strange. (BTW: Companies aren't in the habit of giving their intellectual property and non-compete forms up front. They wait until you've committed, to make it less painful to back out.)
What do you end up with? A very nice company name on your resume. I agree with the other poster. Expect to leave your first job after a year and a half. Chances are, you're going to be unhappy with the page, and based on common knowledge (and a recent SAGE survey), pay increases in IT happen by switching to another company -- not doing an excellent job for the company you are working for.
Of course, you should take your first job seriously, but if it isn't the "perfect" company, that's fine. In fact, its probably better if your first job isn't a place you'd like to stay. Hurts your pay and your resume.
Showbiz pizza purchased Chuck E. Cheese (which was either partially or fully owned by Noland Bushnell, of Atari fame). The mouse was embraced and extended into the Showbiz Pizza family.
It is a pleasant surprise that they are still around. Too bad they haven't upgrading the animitronics.
Earlier, I said that that the arcade games currently stand out only as 'glorified amusement park rides'. Your post reminded me that it isn't entirely the case.
The other two categories are redemption games (put in $.25, get three tickets, you're 1/10th of the way to a plastic ring), and gambling machines (ala Video Poker and Video Slots).
How the mighty have fallen. Atari certainly was a market leader, was it not? They were the first to market with a number of neat things, and one of the first to disappear (first the home games and computing divisions, then the coin-op branch).
The classic 'arcade' is pretty much gone. This will continue unless the arcade game manufacturers (which are actually the home video game publishers) decide that the arcade actually qualifies as a form of 'advertisement', and decides to subsidize the cost of arcade games.
If home arcade games are just as good as the home versions, then the only reason (aside from nostalga) to go to an arcade is to see the latest stuff before they are released as home versions.
Your avid arcade game collector knows that the arcade industry has been on the decline since 1984. A number of reasons have been given. The main reason seems to have been a glut of copy-cat games and an end of originality in the arcades. (This was briefly broken by the Street Fighter genre. Briefly, mind you.)
Modern arcade games seem to be a kind of advertisement for the home game. I obtained a Killer Instinct PCB a year ago, only to be bombarded with a intro screen announcing it would be available for the "Nintendo ULTRA 64". Probably one of the most blatent examples.
Then, there's the glorified amusement park rides. Either your racing games, or your motorized/pnumatic/hydrolic controlled simulator type of environment. That's about the only way an arcade game can differentiate itself from the home game.
At the start of the arcade business, that was not true. The "home version" was pale in comparison to the arcade original. The arcade showcased the latest in technology, which was years away from what was available in the home.
Today, the situation is quite difference. In fact, the X-Box seems to put the final nail in the coffin. Arcade game manufacturers may very well stop creating arcade games on custom hardware. Instead, they'll compile for an X-Box style platform. Why? For the ease of conversion to the home game. That's where the money is. The arcade game is just the 'advertisement' to create the buzz.
Sega once made an unsuccessful attempt at something similar. Remeber the Sega Saturn? Well, it has its arcade counterpart, the Sega Titan hardware, which a number of games were based off of (example: Die Hard Arcade, Batman, Winter Heat). But it failed to catch firew, and a small number of games were targeted to the Titan platform (which had an easy route to make the games work on the Saturn).
It is very likely, however, that Microsoft is going to win where Sega failed. The X-Box is a 'sure thing' platform. Create your arcade games for the X-Box platform, and you'll have an easy route to make a home version.
What arcade collectors may not realize at this point, is that if Microsoft pull things off right, the existing arcade standard, JAMMA, could go the way of the vector game, into arcade history. X-Box could very well become the next arcade standard -- and home platform standard.
I'm not looking forward to it, myself. But I'm willing to believe that home and arcade game manufacturers are. Of course, Microsoft seems to have a habit of getting version 1.0 of everything wrong. But with no real competition, I think it puts a nail in the coffin of the arcade industry as we know it today.
I'm actually rather disappointed at the discussion so far. I figured I'd see something a little more lively than this. Here's part of what I know:
The SPARC64-GP is significantly faster than the UltraSPARC II at the same clock rates. Yes, the particular web site referencing the SPARC64-GP is old, but the architectual improvements over the USII are the same, and the clock rates have increased.
Of course, the answer is that "UltraSPARC III" is just around the corner. But Fujitsu isn't standing still, and is working on processors and platforms of their own. What I *hope* we're looking at is an Intel/AMD leapfrog kind of competition where we've got some real competition on performance and price.
One area that I've been told that Fujitsu isn't all that hot on (but they are working on the issue) is support/service. They're not quite at the helpdesk level. But I know locally that AMDAHL has been training people to support their new Sun hardware.
Personally, I invited Fujitsu to give our site a presentation next week. I'm anxious to see what kind of things they have to offer. Its apparent that they CURRENTLY have something that can compete with the Sun line in price and performance... from the E220 to the E10k level. I have heard good things about the stability of the solutions that they offer.
I think it is important that Fujitsu starts marketing themselves to Sun shops and giving them an idea of where they are going. I want to see the concentrating on the support side harder. I think I'd be a little scared to run a 64-way box (with domains) connected to EMC via Jaycor fiber cards, and running an Oracle database. If they had a hardcore service division, I wouldn't be so scared.
Yes, but there's also melted glass in the ancient egyptian pyramids. :)
First, I wanted to provide a URL that provides an example of the speed differences between CAS speeds. This is one of several URLs I came across. 3dhardware.net review of cas2 vs cas3 at various bus speeds.
Second, in their article, they made a very good point. For almost all tasks, you're going to be better off INCREASING the amount of SDRAM you have in your system, versus upgrading to DDRAM. Why? Because with the extra RAM, you're going to be caching more and you're going to be churning your hard drive a whole lot less. And if you think SDRAM is slow, in comparitive terms, getting data off of the hard drive is like watching glass melt at room temperature. (Note: It does happen. Just VERY VERY slowly.)
So, if you are UPGRADING a system, you're going to be better off with more memory rather than going DDRAM. Way more bang for the buck, unless you've got a major specific thing you work with that you know that DDRAM is somehow going to give a big advantage (rare).
I was also reading a bit about the future of memory. It seems that there are things coming down the pipe, that by the time you want to upgrade your NEW system, you probably won't be using your current SDRAM or DDRAM modules. So it almost makes sense to keep with your current memory modules and get more life out of them. Or at least to spend your money on MORE memory, rather than FASTER memory. (Which MORE memory will equal FASTER performance, even if you don't have the fastest memory around.)
Hope this helps!
I've been heavily researching this issue, lately, going from hardware site to hardware site. A summary of what I have found is as follows:
A 133mhz front side bus is significantly better than a 100mhz front side bus.
There is almost no performance difference between CAS 2.5 and CAS 2 memory.
On the Athlon, the choice between DDR and SDR RAM makes little difference in terms of performance, except in unusual circumstances.
In order to better answer the question, we have to know what you're doing with the machine.
For example, will you be playing one of the first person shooters where the graphics card is traditionally the bottleneck? If so, your answer is obvious -- don't DDR. But if you're playing some of the others where memory transfer rates are important, and performance in that game is important to you, the DDR is a good bet.
For a "general task" computer running Windows, SDR is fine. BTW, none of the benchmarks I've seen consider how a Linux OS would respond. Interesting, no?
Yahoo's problem is they've diversified WAY beyond their core business. They want to be AOL, in a way. More diversification costs them more and more money, with the payback reaching beyond 2020. Assuming there isn't a disruptive technology that they can't deal with, they'll probably make it.
What is the general legal status of Atari games? What all does Hasbro own? Are there any pieces that are actually free and clear?
The best summary of this is that "The Database IS the Business". It all depends on how much the integrity of the database is worth to you. It also depends on how well you want to scale up the business. And I'm not *just* talking about the database, but the level of support, and the personel who are trained and *qualified* to manage your data.
It's kind of funny to say it this way, but I'd have to wonder what the correlation is between successful businesses, and commercial databases.
At the big business side, an open source database isn't even a consideration. Its at the low-end of the scale that it is. And the single driver for going with an open source database doesn't *seem* to be reliability, cost, or 'openness'. (Do you want your people modifying how the database's internal code works?) Its about dollars. Businesses with dollars will (with rare exceptions) choose a commercial and well-trusted database.
In fact, it sounds dangerous to set up a business there until the way the court works and makes judgements has been set down and proven out. By setting up there, a business has a strange liability that is unknown.
Hmmm, let's extrapolate from the past: white male starship captain, older starship captain, black starship captain, woman starship captain... I figure the next one up will be an older, woman black starship captain. Probably not bald, but we can't be sure.
Nope! Either the captain will be a very compelling non-human, or it'll be a gay Arab man with a superintelligent pet that gets the crew past the more sticky situations.