Who says free software is passé? Hollywood's special-effects industry can't get enough of the operating system built by hackers, for hackers.
This story is good news, I'm glad Linux is catching on in popularity, I recently switched to Linux on my personal PC and I'm enjoying every minute of it. The reason for my switch: I used to use it at school, I use it at work, and Windows XP is as crooked as a politician, so I switched to good ol' Linux. Linux is a great OS and the best thing about it is that the more you become a power user, the more powerful you become. It's absolutely the most flexible and tweakable system out there. This public perception however, "by hackers for hackers," is crap, and we need to frown upon it. Linux is built by software enthusiasts, not "hackers." I'm not a Linux history expert, but I have a good feel for the way things are at this moment, and I have to say that nowadays Linux users are a wide range of people, including big businesses, educators, kids, the computer nerds like myself, etc. Linux was built, and continues to be built, by people with a great knowlege of software engineering and the desire to provide a democratic style OS that is both powerful and easy to use, and best of all: free.
Now we see the violence inherent in the system... ... OK, enough Monty Python references.
The agreement would reportedly force the software company to end restrictive deals with computer makers, release some of the software code for Internet Explorer, and offer versions of Windows with and without added features such as MSN Messenger.
Hey, that's pretty cool! It's about time they outlawed Microsoft's policy of retailers selling their souls to the Devil... er... Bill Gates. Those contracts are a ridiculous plight on the computer world. Maybe now we'll be able to tell our not-so-computer-literate friends and relatives that for their next computer they can just hop on over to Best Buy or somewhere and pick up a PC with Mandrake or RedHat instead of Windows XP 2.3 SP 5 rel 2 ver 8. Well, in reality, that's probably really far off...
I wonder exactly what portions of code they have to release for internet explorer... I doubt they'll let go of anything all too relative.
With or without MSN... now seriously, do you think Microsoft will just let that happen? I'm sure you'll have to specifically ask for a non MSN computer, and each store will probably have 0 of them, but when you request it they'll go uninstall it. Of course the first time you log onto your computer you'll see a little message pop up: "wouldn't you like to send messages to your friends as well as shop at several convenient online stores, well here's the only way to do that: MSN!"
And now for something completely different...
The tentative deal calls for a five-year consent decree between the government and Microsoft governing the company's conduct, The New York Times and Washington Post reported on their Web sites Wednesday evening, citing anonymous sources. According to those sources, the deal included the possibility of a two-year extension if the company violates the terms of the agreement. To try to ensure enforcement, a three-member advisory committee of independent experts would be established, The Times reported.
OK, great idea, but three people? This to me is just another indication that the people in charge of righting Microsoft's many wrongs really have a limited or nonexistant knowlege of the actual subject. Microsoft's wide range of products and services and practices of leveraging monopolies are so complex, convoluded, and "sneaky" that you would need at least a dozen people working full time so have a minimal understanding of it all. They would need an OS expert, internet expert, networking expert, database expert, Office expert, ISP expert, messaging expert, etc... Three people, especially if they're lawyers, really isn't enough.
The existence of such a technology, the amendment states, ''may seriously intrude on the privacy of these users. The use of such devices should therefore be prohibited unless the explicit, well-informed and freely given consent of the users concerned has been obtained.''
Now, aside from porno sites, when is the last time you've ever been asked for your "explicit, well-informed and freely given consent?" Explicit... ok, yes or no, pretty simple. Well-informed... ha! right! Not if it might contain proprietary information. Definitely no well-informing going on if we're talking about Microsoft. Freely given... another ha! right! "Either you agree, or you can't use any of our service." That seems to be the uniform quote. When's the last time you had a third option on a license agreement. Heck, with MSN, you don't even have a choice, if you don't have the right browser, they won't even let you attempt to view the site.
OK guys, sorry to be a little off topic, but I'm a little annoyed at the moment with the lack of support from HomePNA for Linux. At my apartment my roomate and I share an ADSL connection using HomePNA 2.0 and computers with Windows installed. I'm trying to move over to Linux but now I can't get to the internet unless I boot up under Windoze because Linux won't support my USB 2Wire HomePNA 2.0 card.
Anyway, in order for Linux to compete in the broad PC market they have to support little conveniences like running a home network over your phone lines (not everyone has the time, money, or ability to run cat 5 all over the place.) It's great that Amazon is supporting Linux and singing it's praises, but there's still a long way to go before every day people switch over to Linux.
So, anybody know anything about HomePNA 2.0 on Linux?
It's not nice to put words in someone else's mouth. I did read the article. The article didn't address the technical problems I was speaking of and others have posted. As an engineer I also am responsible for delivering working products, not just a bunch of theoretical promise. The most important thing in engineering is not chasing down wild new concepts and getting them to work (that's what professors are for,) it's making money using your problem solving skills.
Re:Also, transistors cannot be made for base 3
on
Ternary Computing
·
· Score: 1
That's a good explaination of what I was trying to get at with my first point. Actually making the hardware to to ternary logic would be a nightmare.
Fascinating, but not practical, here's why:
on
Ternary Computing
·
· Score: 5, Informative
I looked over the article and it made a good arument for a ternary computing architecture, however there are some big problems with this that were not addressed in the article. Although I'm not a math expert, I did gain a math minor in college during my computer engineering curriculum, and I have to say ternary computing seems to have too many complex problems that need solving to be worth it.
First of all, hardware is getting smaller and smaller all the time, so the whole premise behind ternary computing (base 3 would use less hardware) doesn't apply, especially since brand new gates would have to be made in order to distinguish between 3 signal levels rather than 2, and that would be taking a HUGE step backwards.
Secondly, doing things on a chip or two is great, but the main problem in computing is communications. The major part of creating efficient communications protocols is determining the probability of a bit error. Probability is a very complicated science, even using the binary distribution, which is a very simple function (that just happens to escape me at the moment.) Now, add another bit, and you have to use a trinary distribution, which I'm sure exists but isn't very common (and not surprisingly, I can't recall that one either). Long story short, this theoretical math has been made practical in computer communications over a long period of time dating back 50 years, starting all over with 3 bits rather than 2 would be extremely complicated and VERY, VERY expensive. Finally, figuring out logical schemes for advanced, specialized chips is a daunting task. Engineers have come up with shortcuts over the years (K-maps, state diagrams, special algorithms, etc) but adding in a 3rd state to each input would make things almost impossibly complicated. All computer engineers working at the hardware level would have to be re-educated, starting with the simplest of logical gates.
Overall, in my humble opinion, we'll never see large scale use of ternary computing. There's just too much overhead involved in switching over the way of doing things at such a fundamental level. The way hardware advances each year, things are getting smaller and smaller without switching the number base, so until we reach the limit using binary, we'll probably stick with it.
So I guess XP finally gets to Mac OS7 level
on
MS DOS: A Eulogy
·
· Score: 1
OK, I'm not seriously saying that Mac OS 7 was as powerful as XP, but I find it funny that for years the main argument against Macintosh was it had no command line interface, and now here Microsoft is removing MS-DOS from their OS. It doesn't really matter though because XP has so many other arguments against it already. I guess it's time for everyone to switch to Linux.
Another interesting little tidbit is that Cesium was intended to be well documented from the very start. Error messages are dynamically generated and context sensitive, meaning that almost any error comes with a plain English description of exactly what happened, how it probably happened, and how to fix it.
I have nothing else to say, that in istelf is all I ever wanted from my OS.
Then again, as the games are clearly targeted at a young audience, they may appeal more to kids than me.
What are you talking about? Did you play Star Wars? How about Madden 2002? Resident Evil? Wave Racer? Yes there were some kiddie games, but why is that such a bad thing? Kids have to have fun too. Pikimin was good? Are you on crack? Star Wars was the Killer App, hands down.
Graphics on par with PS2. In spite of specs that don't look as good on paper as ps2 ('cept RAM, I guess), the EA games (NBA and Madden) looked every bit as good as the ps2 versions.
Ummm, well.. hmmm, maybe you haven't seen the specs, but if you go to cube.ign.com I'm sure you can find some. The Gamecube is the leader in all areas except clock speed, which in reality doesn't matter because it has the highest processing power, it just takes less clock cycles to produce it. It runs off of a PowerPC-type RISC chip that was designed specifically for gaming (not watching DVD's). The most important areas are PPS (polygons per second) and Colors, and the GameCube has the lead in each of those categories. Anyway, all the stats in the world don't matter, PS2 has what feels like a 2 second delay between your movements and the game's reaction where the GameCube flows right along with your input, and that's the most important thing to me.
OK, first of all, as an avid Nintendo supporter and GameCube fan, I take offense to this:
Most games were disappointing, but Rogue Leader and suprisingly Luigi's Mansion were a lot of fun.
Luigi's Mansion? Please! Apparently the author must have not felt like standing in some of the longer lines to play the really cool games. I agree with his comment on Rogue Leader, it was most impressive.
Anyway, as to what I thought, I really enjoyed the preview. I have a cube on preorder along with a few games and I can't wait to get mine. The controller is really nice, unlike the N64 they really made a controller that "fits" your hand this time. The response of the controls is also very nice, unlike PS2 or Xbox, you really get a feel for the game, as soon as you move, it moves. *My favorite game was Star Wars... I've been a big Star Wars fan for as long as I can remember and this game is about as close as you can get to actually flying around in futuristic space and fighting the evil empire. *I also really liked Madden 2002, although I was a little dissapointed at the way it seemed to be just a carbon copy of the PS2 version. There were a few differences and I'm sure once my copy arrives I'll notice them better. *Another really fun game was Super Smash Brothers. They had 4 controllers set up and it was a blast using Samus to whoop some teenager ass. That game is hilarious, all out fun and it's surprisingly cool to fight with all the classic Nintendo Characters. *The new version of WaveRace was stunning. I really liked the N64 version but this new one delivers on every graphical aspect of the gamecube. You can actually see individual fish under the water as you're speeding by. *There was also a basketball game there, I don't remember the title but it wasn't EA Sports, and it also wasn't very good. The graphics were nice but it seemed to me to move too slowly, but I'm not a big basketball fan anyway.
Well, that's what I thought about the games I played while I was there. I didn't play any others so I'm not going to talk about them, although I saw a long line for this Resident Evil type game. Anyway, only a few more weeks!
I work in System Integration/Engineering of digital cable systems (headend, transport, set top boxes, etc) and my job requires that I'm capable of supporting any piece of equipment throughout the entire system. Conversely, I am using windows 2000 here at work and do not have rights to install any software or even make setup changes to my machine (this even includes the system time.) As you might imagine, this makes things very difficult for me as I am constantly having to track down a spare laptop or a computer in the lab that isn't being used (and there aren't many of either) in order to install applications that deal with the individual components of the system. The main problem is upgrades to software, this stuff is all brand new, emerging technology and so it is updated at an insane rate, so for instance if I need to update a console emulator for the control console of one of the headend controllers, I have to send the update to the IT guys, file a ticket, and wait for him to have time to install it on my machine. Luckily I have the flexibility of a large lab to work in and I can find ways around not being able to use my desktop in my cube. However, if I was not restricted in such a way I would be much more productive, as the very nature of workarounds is to produce more work, and reduce the amount of work I can finish.
To sum up my opinion: developers should have "power user" rights. They should be able to do whatever they want to with their machines with the understanding that if they mess it up, IT will send it a fresh new image that will wipe the computer clean and start from scratch. They should not be given administrative rights because then they would potentially mess up the network. Having your developers work on desktops with restricted access is like having them work on dumb terminals and results in loss of efficiency.
OK, well it's obvious to me now that you're either employed by Microsoft or you're a die hard MCSC technician. In light of this, I'm not even going to try and argue any further.
I would like to point out, however, that if you're going to tell me that I am completely wrong with my views and that they have no basis in reality then it is required that you present some explanation of your rebuttal. It is not a valid counterpoint in an argument to say: "go read a book" or "I bet you've been reading anti Microsoft material." In order to refute the information I have presented then you must present proof that I am wrong, not personal insults.
PS - I replied to your post, the threading did not work correctly, hopefully it will this time as you seem to be so concerned.
So then explain to me how misinformed I am. Everything I've seen about.NET points to a centralized online purchasing center. Companies have to pay Microsoft to maintain this center and allow the companies to funnel their purchases through it. Customers sign on and can make purchases on any web site that uses this.NET. My fears arise out of the fact that Microsoft has demonstrated a propensity towards illegal action, specifically monopoly leveraging. I'm afraid they will use their monopoly in the OS to creat one for.NET, and what they will use that one for is unimaginable.
Seems like this author is pretty good at it. True, Sun has it's own motivations, but this article seemed to say exactly what I've been thinking, and did so in a much more eloquent manner than I'm capable of. This comment in particular illustrates the exact problem with Microsoft.NET:
Just as kings got to grant or deny royal charters to businesses, the Redmond giant, if successful, may be able to say who can do business on the Net and who can't.
In reality, that is what Microsoft is aiming for as they have already attained a similar situation with their operating system. They have also used their OS to leverage other monopolies and with the wide range of impact.NET would have if it were a monopoly, Microsoft just might position themselves to monopolize everything. Yes that is doomsday talk, but if you analyze the situation, it's really not that wild of an idea.
It will be a sad day if retailers stop offering online purchases to those who aren't.NET members. Linux has the power to bring down the Microsoft OS monopoly. In my opinion this is a big motivation for the developmentof.NET. If.NET becomes a monopoly and there is no other way to make a purchase online, what kind of competition could bring it down?
Here are just a few recent ones from Microsoft: (from the article)
Through Windows XP, MSN is emerging as a major end point for delivering those services. The majority of Microsoft's most popular products link to MSN.
Office XP, for example, features a pull-down, get-more-info menu feature called Smart Tags that connects to MSN. One... Microsoft had planned to include Smart Tags in Internet Explorer 6 but pulled the feature. Financial programs Money. Two... and Great Plains. Three... also lean heavily on MSN features. Besides launching MSN as the default home page, Internet Explorer 6 replaces the more typical "page not found" with an MSN search page.. Four...
Windows XP is chock full of MSN hooks. The Internet search feature from the Start Menu uses MSN.. Five... Windows Media Player drives traffic to MSN. Six... , as does the Passport authentication feature found in Windows Messenger. The Photo & Camera Wizard, where people can order online prints from digital images, also directs traffic to MSN. Seven....
Seven, that's right, seven examples of leveraging their existing monopoly (the OS, which is XP) to create further monopolies (MSN.) If MSN was just another news and entertainment website I wouldn't be saying this, but as we've learned recently: through passport MSN will soon be a center for software applications delivered over the internet. This is a new market and will probably be a very profitable one. If Microsoft can create a monopoly (or near monopoly) on such a market, they will be in the same position with Passport as they are with their OS. This will not be good for internet consumers.
Seriously, how many of you have dealt with your local IT guy and not thought that they were previously gang bangers? All you have to do is look at the situation where you have an IT group rather than just one guy, they revert back to their gang mentality. True it is a more nerdy gang and there's more pocket protectors and less Uzis and bandanas, but think about it, they operate like a gang.
Think back to the last time you needed to install a program, you couldn't do it because you don't have "administrative rights." In other words, it's IT's turf, and you can't tread on it. Then you asked the IT guy that was floating around if he could do it, and he said "you need to talk to my administrator." In other words, knuck-knuck can't make those types of decisions, show some respect and go talk to little T-Moe if you want to get the hookup. So you go talk to little T-Moe and you say that it's Mission Critical and you need it ASAP. Well, he says "we have logged your request and we will assist you as soon as we have the resources." In other words, as soon as Big-C is finished with his 40 ounce and box of BBQ Wangs, he'll bounce on over to your cube and computer-jack your workstation for the couple of hours it takes him to install your application. Then you call little T-Moe when the job is done to say thanks, and all he says is "fuhgettaboutit."
This also poses another interesting question: were they gangbangers before or after they graduated from the Devry institute?
Seriously though, this program of troubled youths to web developers is something to watch closely and see how things turn out, if it ends up being positive and these kids really become upstanding citizens then we need to start more similar technology related programs.
But of course if it doesn't work out then this just means there will be a lot more websites that steal your credit card information...
All of the news about XP over the last few months describing all of the ways Microsoft is continuing to be a software bully and stifling competition, resulting in me, the end user, getting less "cool stuff" for my windows PC has resulted in this: XP is the last straw. I am switching over to Linux as my primary platform and using Windows 2000 as a backup on a small partition. I've worked with Unix before and my roomate is an expert on Linux so I think I'll be able to pick it up and become a power user in no time. Given the small amount of time I actually use my computer at home and the amount of work it will take to get all of my devices working under Linux I didn't want to make that sort of investment in learning a new, more powerful OS that requires me to manually configure everything, but I am so disgusted with Microsoft that I am now willing to do so. If you don't really care what OS I use, fine, sorry to waste your time, but for those of you Linux lovers out there I thought you would be happy to know that Microsoft is actually driving people away, and making Linux stronger, just by being the evil company they are.
Sullivan called the company's inability to update search results "inexcusable" and said it feeds suspicions that paid listings take priority over generic search results. "This is something people have been paranoid about. If you're going to start charging people to submit, does that mean Web sites that can't afford to pay will get overlooked?"
Gee, I wonder? I think it's common knowlege that those who pay to be listed are given priority to those who don't, otherwise there would be no motivation to pay. It's economics, plain and simple. I haven't read through the fine print of the Alta Vista usage policy but I'm pretty sure they outline the priority system there. I would be rather surprised if a search engine company charged people for their listings and then didn't give the paying customers some sort of benefit. On the other hand, just because someone doesn't pay doesn't mean they will be overlooked, but they will not get massive amounts of traffic based on their Alta Vista listing. Someone who's semi-comfortable using the search engine will probably construct powerful enough searches that if you're site has what they want, they will see it in their list of matches, probably somewhere close to the top. If someone has the same material on their site and they pay, theirs will be one above yours, and that's the way it should be.
It really is a shame that Alta Vista is getting lazy updating their free listings though, they have a great search tool and I like a lot of their functions, but it is outdated information and like the author I end up using Google most of the time.
I don't know what the actual laws are or what the actual subroutines are that get optomized, but as a matter of principle I don't believe it's fair to make optimizations geared only to a certain application that could possibly benefit a wide variety of applications. This means that the ATI producer has a bias towards Quake and by making these optimizations hinders the speed and performance of Quake's competitors, and that's not right.
On the other hand, this benchmark seems sketchy to me. There are a lot of variables that go into large applications such as Quake and an example might be (although this is purely hypothetical) that there are resource files that are tied to "Quake.exe" first and then have alternate, slower methods being accessed. When the name is changed from Quake to Quack, the slower methods have to be used. That's just a made up example but it's they type of thing that needs to be taken into consideration. However, like I said before, if these people actually did make optimizations for Quake and only for Quake, I think what they did was unfair and harmful to computer users.
I agree with you. Microsoft continues on a daily basis to use it's OS monopoly as leverage to create more monopolies. It is clearly illegal to anyone who has an understanding of how computer technology works. I even suspect that there is more to it than we've heard about, that Microsoft software actually targets other applications, forcing them to lock up or halt. Netscape made that claim a while back but nobody really took heed to it. Anyway, you're right, MS is bad for computers and the internet, and I wish the FTC would do something.
You are so correct it hurts. I'm an "apple person" but I have to say this is nonsense. For a car, yes 5 or 10 GB is good, but for something to tote around with you, I'd be happy with 150 Megs or so, enough to carry a couple dozen songs or so.
Slashdot Mirror
Who says free software is passé? Hollywood's special-effects industry can't get enough of the operating system built by hackers, for hackers.
This story is good news, I'm glad Linux is catching on in popularity, I recently switched to Linux on my personal PC and I'm enjoying every minute of it. The reason for my switch: I used to use it at school, I use it at work, and Windows XP is as crooked as a politician, so I switched to good ol' Linux. Linux is a great OS and the best thing about it is that the more you become a power user, the more powerful you become. It's absolutely the most flexible and tweakable system out there. This public perception however, "by hackers for hackers," is crap, and we need to frown upon it. Linux is built by software enthusiasts, not "hackers." I'm not a Linux history expert, but I have a good feel for the way things are at this moment, and I have to say that nowadays Linux users are a wide range of people, including big businesses, educators, kids, the computer nerds like myself, etc. Linux was built, and continues to be built, by people with a great knowlege of software engineering and the desire to provide a democratic style OS that is both powerful and easy to use, and best of all: free.
Now we see the violence inherent in the system...
... OK, enough Monty Python references.
The agreement would reportedly force the software company to end restrictive deals with computer makers, release some of the software code for Internet Explorer, and offer versions of Windows with and without added features such as MSN Messenger.
Hey, that's pretty cool! It's about time they outlawed Microsoft's policy of retailers selling their souls to the Devil... er... Bill Gates. Those contracts are a ridiculous plight on the computer world. Maybe now we'll be able to tell our not-so-computer-literate friends and relatives that for their next computer they can just hop on over to Best Buy or somewhere and pick up a PC with Mandrake or RedHat instead of Windows XP 2.3 SP 5 rel 2 ver 8. Well, in reality, that's probably really far off...
I wonder exactly what portions of code they have to release for internet explorer... I doubt they'll let go of anything all too relative.
With or without MSN... now seriously, do you think Microsoft will just let that happen? I'm sure you'll have to specifically ask for a non MSN computer, and each store will probably have 0 of them, but when you request it they'll go uninstall it. Of course the first time you log onto your computer you'll see a little message pop up: "wouldn't you like to send messages to your friends as well as shop at several convenient online stores, well here's the only way to do that: MSN!"
And now for something completely different...
The tentative deal calls for a five-year consent decree between the government and Microsoft governing the company's conduct, The New York Times and Washington Post reported on their Web sites Wednesday evening, citing anonymous sources. According to those sources, the deal included the possibility of a two-year extension if the company violates the terms of the agreement. To try to ensure enforcement, a three-member advisory committee of independent experts would be established, The Times reported.
OK, great idea, but three people? This to me is just another indication that the people in charge of righting Microsoft's many wrongs really have a limited or nonexistant knowlege of the actual subject. Microsoft's wide range of products and services and practices of leveraging monopolies are so complex, convoluded, and "sneaky" that you would need at least a dozen people working full time so have a minimal understanding of it all. They would need an OS expert, internet expert, networking expert, database expert, Office expert, ISP expert, messaging expert, etc... Three people, especially if they're lawyers, really isn't enough.
... something's wrong...
The existence of such a technology, the amendment states, ''may seriously intrude on the privacy of these users. The use of such devices should therefore be prohibited unless the explicit, well-informed and freely given consent of the users concerned has been obtained.''
Now, aside from porno sites, when is the last time you've ever been asked for your "explicit, well-informed and freely given consent?" Explicit... ok, yes or no, pretty simple. Well-informed... ha! right! Not if it might contain proprietary information. Definitely no well-informing going on if we're talking about Microsoft. Freely given... another ha! right! "Either you agree, or you can't use any of our service." That seems to be the uniform quote. When's the last time you had a third option on a license agreement. Heck, with MSN, you don't even have a choice, if you don't have the right browser, they won't even let you attempt to view the site.
OK guys, sorry to be a little off topic, but I'm a little annoyed at the moment with the lack of support from HomePNA for Linux. At my apartment my roomate and I share an ADSL connection using HomePNA 2.0 and computers with Windows installed. I'm trying to move over to Linux but now I can't get to the internet unless I boot up under Windoze because Linux won't support my USB 2Wire HomePNA 2.0 card.
Anyway, in order for Linux to compete in the broad PC market they have to support little conveniences like running a home network over your phone lines (not everyone has the time, money, or ability to run cat 5 all over the place.) It's great that Amazon is supporting Linux and singing it's praises, but there's still a long way to go before every day people switch over to Linux.
So, anybody know anything about HomePNA 2.0 on Linux?
It's not nice to put words in someone else's mouth. I did read the article. The article didn't address the technical problems I was speaking of and others have posted. As an engineer I also am responsible for delivering working products, not just a bunch of theoretical promise. The most important thing in engineering is not chasing down wild new concepts and getting them to work (that's what professors are for,) it's making money using your problem solving skills.
That's a good explaination of what I was trying to get at with my first point. Actually making the hardware to to ternary logic would be a nightmare.
I looked over the article and it made a good arument for a ternary computing architecture, however there are some big problems with this that were not addressed in the article. Although I'm not a math expert, I did gain a math minor in college during my computer engineering curriculum, and I have to say ternary computing seems to have too many complex problems that need solving to be worth it.
First of all, hardware is getting smaller and smaller all the time, so the whole premise behind ternary computing (base 3 would use less hardware) doesn't apply, especially since brand new gates would have to be made in order to distinguish between 3 signal levels rather than 2, and that would be taking a HUGE step backwards.
Secondly, doing things on a chip or two is great, but the main problem in computing is communications. The major part of creating efficient communications protocols is determining the probability of a bit error. Probability is a very complicated science, even using the binary distribution, which is a very simple function (that just happens to escape me at the moment.) Now, add another bit, and you have to use a trinary distribution, which I'm sure exists but isn't very common (and not surprisingly, I can't recall that one either). Long story short, this theoretical math has been made practical in computer communications over a long period of time dating back 50 years, starting all over with 3 bits rather than 2 would be extremely complicated and VERY, VERY expensive.
Finally, figuring out logical schemes for advanced, specialized chips is a daunting task. Engineers have come up with shortcuts over the years (K-maps, state diagrams, special algorithms, etc) but adding in a 3rd state to each input would make things almost impossibly complicated. All computer engineers working at the hardware level would have to be re-educated, starting with the simplest of logical gates.
Overall, in my humble opinion, we'll never see large scale use of ternary computing. There's just too much overhead involved in switching over the way of doing things at such a fundamental level. The way hardware advances each year, things are getting smaller and smaller without switching the number base, so until we reach the limit using binary, we'll probably stick with it.
http://www.gaming-xtreme.com/site/systems/gamecube .asp
OK, I'm not seriously saying that Mac OS 7 was as powerful as XP, but I find it funny that for years the main argument against Macintosh was it had no command line interface, and now here Microsoft is removing MS-DOS from their OS. It doesn't really matter though because XP has so many other arguments against it already. I guess it's time for everyone to switch to Linux.
Another interesting little tidbit is that Cesium was intended to be well documented from the very start. Error messages are dynamically generated and context sensitive, meaning that almost any error comes with a plain English description of exactly what happened, how it probably happened, and how to fix it.
I have nothing else to say, that in istelf is all I ever wanted from my OS.
Then again, as the games are clearly targeted at a young audience, they may appeal more to kids than me.
What are you talking about? Did you play Star Wars? How about Madden 2002? Resident Evil? Wave Racer? Yes there were some kiddie games, but why is that such a bad thing? Kids have to have fun too. Pikimin was good? Are you on crack? Star Wars was the Killer App, hands down.
Graphics on par with PS2. In spite of specs that don't look as good on paper as ps2 ('cept RAM, I guess), the EA games (NBA and Madden) looked every bit as good as the ps2 versions.
Ummm, well.. hmmm, maybe you haven't seen the specs, but if you go to cube.ign.com I'm sure you can find some. The Gamecube is the leader in all areas except clock speed, which in reality doesn't matter because it has the highest processing power, it just takes less clock cycles to produce it. It runs off of a PowerPC-type RISC chip that was designed specifically for gaming (not watching DVD's). The most important areas are PPS (polygons per second) and Colors, and the GameCube has the lead in each of those categories. Anyway, all the stats in the world don't matter, PS2 has what feels like a 2 second delay between your movements and the game's reaction where the GameCube flows right along with your input, and that's the most important thing to me.
OK, first of all, as an avid Nintendo supporter and GameCube fan, I take offense to this:
Most games were disappointing, but Rogue Leader and suprisingly Luigi's Mansion were a lot of fun.
Luigi's Mansion? Please! Apparently the author must have not felt like standing in some of the longer lines to play the really cool games. I agree with his comment on Rogue Leader, it was most impressive.
Anyway, as to what I thought, I really enjoyed the preview. I have a cube on preorder along with a few games and I can't wait to get mine. The controller is really nice, unlike the N64 they really made a controller that "fits" your hand this time. The response of the controls is also very nice, unlike PS2 or Xbox, you really get a feel for the game, as soon as you move, it moves.
*My favorite game was Star Wars... I've been a big Star Wars fan for as long as I can remember and this game is about as close as you can get to actually flying around in futuristic space and fighting the evil empire.
*I also really liked Madden 2002, although I was a little dissapointed at the way it seemed to be just a carbon copy of the PS2 version. There were a few differences and I'm sure once my copy arrives I'll notice them better.
*Another really fun game was Super Smash Brothers. They had 4 controllers set up and it was a blast using Samus to whoop some teenager ass. That game is hilarious, all out fun and it's surprisingly cool to fight with all the classic Nintendo Characters.
*The new version of WaveRace was stunning. I really liked the N64 version but this new one delivers on every graphical aspect of the gamecube. You can actually see individual fish under the water as you're speeding by.
*There was also a basketball game there, I don't remember the title but it wasn't EA Sports, and it also wasn't very good. The graphics were nice but it seemed to me to move too slowly, but I'm not a big basketball fan anyway.
Well, that's what I thought about the games I played while I was there. I didn't play any others so I'm not going to talk about them, although I saw a long line for this Resident Evil type game. Anyway, only a few more weeks!
I work in System Integration/Engineering of digital cable systems (headend, transport, set top boxes, etc) and my job requires that I'm capable of supporting any piece of equipment throughout the entire system. Conversely, I am using windows 2000 here at work and do not have rights to install any software or even make setup changes to my machine (this even includes the system time.) As you might imagine, this makes things very difficult for me as I am constantly having to track down a spare laptop or a computer in the lab that isn't being used (and there aren't many of either) in order to install applications that deal with the individual components of the system. The main problem is upgrades to software, this stuff is all brand new, emerging technology and so it is updated at an insane rate, so for instance if I need to update a console emulator for the control console of one of the headend controllers, I have to send the update to the IT guys, file a ticket, and wait for him to have time to install it on my machine. Luckily I have the flexibility of a large lab to work in and I can find ways around not being able to use my desktop in my cube. However, if I was not restricted in such a way I would be much more productive, as the very nature of workarounds is to produce more work, and reduce the amount of work I can finish.
To sum up my opinion: developers should have "power user" rights. They should be able to do whatever they want to with their machines with the understanding that if they mess it up, IT will send it a fresh new image that will wipe the computer clean and start from scratch. They should not be given administrative rights because then they would potentially mess up the network. Having your developers work on desktops with restricted access is like having them work on dumb terminals and results in loss of efficiency.
OK, well it's obvious to me now that you're either employed by Microsoft or you're a die hard MCSC technician. In light of this, I'm not even going to try and argue any further.
I would like to point out, however, that if you're going to tell me that I am completely wrong with my views and that they have no basis in reality then it is required that you present some explanation of your rebuttal. It is not a valid counterpoint in an argument to say: "go read a book" or "I bet you've been reading anti Microsoft material." In order to refute the information I have presented then you must present proof that I am wrong, not personal insults.
PS - I replied to your post, the threading did not work correctly, hopefully it will this time as you seem to be so concerned.
So then explain to me how misinformed I am. Everything I've seen about .NET points to a centralized online purchasing center. Companies have to pay Microsoft to maintain this center and allow the companies to funnel their purchases through it. Customers sign on and can make purchases on any web site that uses this .NET. My fears arise out of the fact that Microsoft has demonstrated a propensity towards illegal action, specifically monopoly leveraging. I'm afraid they will use their monopoly in the OS to creat one for .NET, and what they will use that one for is unimaginable.
Seems like this author is pretty good at it. True, Sun has it's own motivations, but this article seemed to say exactly what I've been thinking, and did so in a much more eloquent manner than I'm capable of. This comment in particular illustrates the exact problem with Microsoft .NET:
.NET would have if it were a monopoly, Microsoft just might position themselves to monopolize everything. Yes that is doomsday talk, but if you analyze the situation, it's really not that wild of an idea.
.NET members. Linux has the power to bring down the Microsoft OS monopoly. In my opinion this is a big motivation for the developmentof .NET. If .NET becomes a monopoly and there is no other way to make a purchase online, what kind of competition could bring it down?
Just as kings got to grant or deny royal charters to businesses, the Redmond giant, if successful, may be able to say who can do business on the Net and who can't.
In reality, that is what Microsoft is aiming for as they have already attained a similar situation with their operating system. They have also used their OS to leverage other monopolies and with the wide range of impact
It will be a sad day if retailers stop offering online purchases to those who aren't
Here are just a few recent ones from Microsoft: (from the article)
. Two... and Great Plains . Three... also lean heavily on MSN features. Besides launching MSN as the default home page, Internet Explorer 6 replaces the more typical "page not found" with an MSN search page.. Four... .
Through Windows XP, MSN is emerging as a major end point for delivering those services. The majority of Microsoft's most popular products link to MSN.
Office XP, for example, features a pull-down, get-more-info menu feature called Smart Tags that connects to MSN. One... Microsoft had planned to include Smart Tags in Internet Explorer 6 but pulled the feature. Financial programs Money
Windows XP is chock full of MSN hooks. The Internet search feature from the Start Menu uses MSN.. Five... Windows Media Player drives traffic to MSN. Six... , as does the Passport authentication feature found in Windows Messenger. The Photo & Camera Wizard, where people can order online prints from digital images, also directs traffic to MSN. Seven...
Seven, that's right, seven examples of leveraging their existing monopoly (the OS, which is XP) to create further monopolies (MSN.)
If MSN was just another news and entertainment website I wouldn't be saying this, but as we've learned recently: through passport MSN will soon be a center for software applications delivered over the internet. This is a new market and will probably be a very profitable one. If Microsoft can create a monopoly (or near monopoly) on such a market, they will be in the same position with Passport as they are with their OS. This will not be good for internet consumers.
Thanks, if I was a moderator I'd mod you up. I appreciate the info.
I thought it was http://www.pimpwars.com/
Seriously, how many of you have dealt with your local IT guy and not thought that they were previously gang bangers? All you have to do is look at the situation where you have an IT group rather than just one guy, they revert back to their gang mentality. True it is a more nerdy gang and there's more pocket protectors and less Uzis and bandanas, but think about it, they operate like a gang.
Think back to the last time you needed to install a program, you couldn't do it because you don't have "administrative rights." In other words, it's IT's turf, and you can't tread on it. Then you asked the IT guy that was floating around if he could do it, and he said "you need to talk to my administrator." In other words, knuck-knuck can't make those types of decisions, show some respect and go talk to little T-Moe if you want to get the hookup. So you go talk to little T-Moe and you say that it's Mission Critical and you need it ASAP. Well, he says "we have logged your request and we will assist you as soon as we have the resources." In other words, as soon as Big-C is finished with his 40 ounce and box of BBQ Wangs, he'll bounce on over to your cube and computer-jack your workstation for the couple of hours it takes him to install your application. Then you call little T-Moe when the job is done to say thanks, and all he says is "fuhgettaboutit."
This also poses another interesting question: were they gangbangers before or after they graduated from the Devry institute?
Seriously though, this program of troubled youths to web developers is something to watch closely and see how things turn out, if it ends up being positive and these kids really become upstanding citizens then we need to start more similar technology related programs.
But of course if it doesn't work out then this just means there will be a lot more websites that steal your credit card information...
All of the news about XP over the last few months describing all of the ways Microsoft is continuing to be a software bully and stifling competition, resulting in me, the end user, getting less "cool stuff" for my windows PC has resulted in this: XP is the last straw. I am switching over to Linux as my primary platform and using Windows 2000 as a backup on a small partition. I've worked with Unix before and my roomate is an expert on Linux so I think I'll be able to pick it up and become a power user in no time. Given the small amount of time I actually use my computer at home and the amount of work it will take to get all of my devices working under Linux I didn't want to make that sort of investment in learning a new, more powerful OS that requires me to manually configure everything, but I am so disgusted with Microsoft that I am now willing to do so. If you don't really care what OS I use, fine, sorry to waste your time, but for those of you Linux lovers out there I thought you would be happy to know that Microsoft is actually driving people away, and making Linux stronger, just by being the evil company they are.
Sullivan called the company's inability to update search results "inexcusable" and said it feeds suspicions that paid listings take priority over generic search results. "This is something people have been paranoid about. If you're going to start charging people to submit, does that mean Web sites that can't afford to pay will get overlooked?"
Gee, I wonder? I think it's common knowlege that those who pay to be listed are given priority to those who don't, otherwise there would be no motivation to pay. It's economics, plain and simple. I haven't read through the fine print of the Alta Vista usage policy but I'm pretty sure they outline the priority system there. I would be rather surprised if a search engine company charged people for their listings and then didn't give the paying customers some sort of benefit. On the other hand, just because someone doesn't pay doesn't mean they will be overlooked, but they will not get massive amounts of traffic based on their Alta Vista listing. Someone who's semi-comfortable using the search engine will probably construct powerful enough searches that if you're site has what they want, they will see it in their list of matches, probably somewhere close to the top. If someone has the same material on their site and they pay, theirs will be one above yours, and that's the way it should be.
It really is a shame that Alta Vista is getting lazy updating their free listings though, they have a great search tool and I like a lot of their functions, but it is outdated information and like the author I end up using Google most of the time.
I don't know what the actual laws are or what the actual subroutines are that get optomized, but as a matter of principle I don't believe it's fair to make optimizations geared only to a certain application that could possibly benefit a wide variety of applications. This means that the ATI producer has a bias towards Quake and by making these optimizations hinders the speed and performance of Quake's competitors, and that's not right.
On the other hand, this benchmark seems sketchy to me. There are a lot of variables that go into large applications such as Quake and an example might be (although this is purely hypothetical) that there are resource files that are tied to "Quake.exe" first and then have alternate, slower methods being accessed. When the name is changed from Quake to Quack, the slower methods have to be used. That's just a made up example but it's they type of thing that needs to be taken into consideration. However, like I said before, if these people actually did make optimizations for Quake and only for Quake, I think what they did was unfair and harmful to computer users.
I agree with you. Microsoft continues on a daily basis to use it's OS monopoly as leverage to create more monopolies. It is clearly illegal to anyone who has an understanding of how computer technology works. I even suspect that there is more to it than we've heard about, that Microsoft software actually targets other applications, forcing them to lock up or halt. Netscape made that claim a while back but nobody really took heed to it. Anyway, you're right, MS is bad for computers and the internet, and I wish the FTC would do something.
You are so correct it hurts. I'm an "apple person" but I have to say this is nonsense. For a car, yes 5 or 10 GB is good, but for something to tote around with you, I'd be happy with 150 Megs or so, enough to carry a couple dozen songs or so.