A PC has more inherant flexibility than does a PSX(2), Sony builds into them the inability to play games that they do not publish.
If Microsoft had designed DOS to not run on non IBM systems, there would be some similarity. Since Sony holds all of the cards, people are at their mercy.
Sure, it's public property... but I don't think I want to be listed... where do I apply? I especially don't want every company who pays a small fee to get my home address phone number aswell as my email... they can do it by looking me up, but I don't want it to be easier than it already is.
This "Cnn" article came right out of Computerworld last week - there stink was that M$ had not made any suggestion as to a patch to win95 until about 2 weeks ago, when infact it had been available for some time - but not on their web pages anywhere..
The PSX2 will be of no substantial threat to the computer industry. Just like every one of its predecessors, the PSX2 will be nothing more than an expensive toy. The WebTV was supposed to dominate the low end market, because you could "surf the web", send e-mail and print from it. Those things are a joke.
The PSX2 may be a cool game only machine, it may be a nice game/DVD machine, but it's not a computer. It doesn't have the power of flexability that a computer has.
If the low price was so important, people would be buying up those $599 specials that we all see. The don't as soon as they see the limitations, people will not even think of trying to replace the computer with some set-top appliance.
Sample conversation.
Console Gamer " I can do 'X' with my PSX2!" Computer Gamer "Well I can do 'W','Y','Z', and I can emulte 'X' on my computer"!
Consoles should die a quick and painful death, the heyday of the Atari 2600 && NES are over.
I can't believe people would pay real $$ for armor, etc. in games. And, more importantly, this probably means Ultima Online is going to go the way of magic the gathering- the rich kids who can afford to buy shitloads of the best cards always win, thus ending the competitive aspect of the game, causing everyone to stop playing it, and making their purchases irrelevant.
It's not the first time M$ withholds a fix for the whole range of Win95. Take the AMD K6 bug that prevents a Win95 system from running stable (well, I wouldn't really call Win95/98 stable...;-) on K6-2 with 350 MHz and up. On their Web-pages they admit that it's a software error, but they only provide fixes for the OEM service releases - not for the initial and quite expensive Win95 retail release. Instead they suggest to call their support line or to upgrade to Win98. In either case it means spending quite an amount of cash for a bugfix that should be a matter of course.
Ever heard of MSCD (or somethin' like that). I believe it stands for Microsoft Certified Developer. I once took such a course (so you think I must know what I'm talking about)... It realy is about programming and not simply using a product.
...is what the article said. Their software *could* have been ported to NT, but the article also mentioned that "...it would take several years..." to do so.
This is the fundemental problem with Win Anything. M$ programming languages are totally non-standard. Having to port a 2E+6 line program from Unix to NT would have been *nasty*, so it's pretty easy to see why they went to Linux instead.
I mean after all, can you be certain that you will be able to remember that you tied your shoe-laces up that morning when tour as old as he is?
Ken Thomson is one of the "tribal elders" of the *nix community. He might not be exatly with it these days, but that's just the way it is ok?
The next time he starts ranting and raving, just smile and nod your head and say "yes grandpa, you tell em grandpa" and refrain from snide and personal remarks, ok. Just remember - some day you'll be old as well.
yeah _right_. I have seen both in action. YOu must be using the world's worse linux dist on a machine with half of its ram fried, and a vanilla nt box. give me a break. nt is a piece of shit with a capital s.
anyway, the fact that the source is open makes such an incredible fucking difference that they can't be compared solely on that basis. sometimes linux does stupid things- like one time it was allocating a shitload of dma class memory for apps that didn't need it, while I needed a good 2 megs to shovel data out to a high speed adc. the solution?- I simply allocated the buffers on kernel boot and locked them in place. obviously if I'd wanted more flexibility it would have been easy to do better than this. if this had occured in nt, forget about it. it would have been buy more ram, and pray to the gods of nt.
The phrase "begs the question" is more than the sum of it's parts.
It is a technical term from the field of logic and means that you have assumed what you set out to prove.
For instance, one favorite creationist argument against evolution is:
"The evolutionists tell us that they know the simpler organisms are older than the more complex ones because their fossils are in lower geologic strata.
But the geologists tell us that they know the lower geologic strata are older because they have simpler (and therefore older) fossils embedded in them.
This, (say the creationists) is begging the question."
Of course, that's not really what geologists and evolutionists say so the creationist rebuttal is moot, but they are right in thinking that this would be an invalid argument.
The class of NP-hard problems are soluble in polynomial time on a non-deterministic Turing machine. A nondeterministic machine will explore many possible solutions in parallel.
Not just "many". A nondeterministic machine will explore all solutions in parallel.
That's what keeps NP-complete problems being cracked by parallel processors--you'd need to add more and more processors as the problem grew larger.
For instance, TSP (Travelling Salesman Problem): Having, say 10 processors only cuts my time by 10--but since the time grows exponentially this is pretty useless pretty soon.
But if I could build the machine AFTER I saw the problem (and add a processor for each city), I could solve it in poly-time--of course, building machines with 5x10^6 processors in pretty infeasible, so a non-parallel solution would be preferred.
Slashdot Mirror
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
>>I'd much rather spend $200 on a console than $3,000 on a PC.
If you're spending that much for a gaming PC, either you need to redefine your requirements or you're being ripped off.
A good, custom built gaming PC shouldn't cost more than $1500-$2000. Depending on the type of options you get.
LK
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
>>isnt that what they said about PCs
A PC has more inherant flexibility than does a PSX(2), Sony builds into them the inability to play games that they do not publish.
If Microsoft had designed DOS to not run on non IBM systems, there would be some similarity. Since Sony holds all of the cards, people are at their mercy.
LK
Posted by Hungry Joe:
Sure, it's public property... but I don't think I want to be listed... where do I apply? I especially don't want every company who pays a small fee to get my home address phone number aswell as my email... they can do it by looking me up, but I don't want it to be easier than it already is.
Posted by pennacook:
This "Cnn" article came right out of Computerworld last week - there stink was that M$ had not made any suggestion as to a patch to win95 until about 2 weeks ago, when infact it had been available for some time - but not on their web pages anywhere..
just a typical M$ tactic...
pennacook
Posted by !ErrorBookmarkNotDefined:
People are using the internet for scams?
This is unheard of!
Without a filter for this kinda article, I have
to ask:
Is it news?
Does it matter?
-----------------------------
Computers are useless. They can only give answers.
Posted by The ULTIMATE Crippler:
...because with a name like "PS2" it is doomed from the beginning.
Regardless of price.
Posted by Lord Kano-The Gangster Of Love:
The PSX2 will be of no substantial threat to the computer industry. Just like every one of its predecessors, the PSX2 will be nothing more than an expensive toy. The WebTV was supposed to dominate the low end market, because you could "surf the web", send e-mail and print from it. Those things are a joke.
The PSX2 may be a cool game only machine, it may be a nice game/DVD machine, but it's not a computer. It doesn't have the power of flexability that a computer has.
If the low price was so important, people would be buying up those $599 specials that we all see. The don't as soon as they see the limitations, people will not even think of trying to replace the computer with some set-top appliance.
Sample conversation.
Console Gamer " I can do 'X' with my PSX2!"
Computer Gamer "Well I can do 'W','Y','Z', and I can emulte 'X' on my computer"!
Consoles should die a quick and painful death, the heyday of the Atari 2600 && NES are over.
LK
Posted by bSMfh (bastard ScoutMaster fro:
Doh!
someone groped my wife's packets!
ping origins
Posted by RolandL:
Would someone PLEASE send them a firewall? Or just configure their router? Maybe they haven't heard about the "established connection" feature.
Christ, these guys are responsible for our defense?
Posted by speed1:
>>To say they are cheating is like your cheating >>when you buy a car. Why didn't you build it >>yourself? CHEATER!!
It is cheating...everyone has a chance to get a normal car with stock parts same as anyone else to get a regular caracter.
BUT it takes away all the fun when you get a car already prep'ed and modified that can probly do 10 secs on a 1/4 mile drag strip.
Posted by DonR:
Or the Qmail book....
---
Donald Roeber
Posted by The Mongolian Barbecue:
I can't believe people would pay real $$ for armor, etc. in games. And, more importantly, this probably means Ultima Online is going to go the way of magic the gathering- the rich kids who can afford to buy shitloads of the best cards always win, thus ending the competitive aspect of the game, causing everyone to stop playing it, and making their purchases irrelevant.
Posted by MojoAndy:
Agreed, Andrew is a great guy and also a long time Linux devotee.
He made me my first set of Debian 1.44M diskettes years ago (like, five or six?) when Achilles was starting out on an ISDN line in his parent's place.
His was the first true ISP around Ottawa, and I wanted to try out gopher under Linux on my 386DX. Oh, back in the day...
Posted by Izchak:
It's not the first time M$ withholds a fix for the whole range of Win95. Take the AMD K6 bug that prevents a Win95 system from running stable (well, I wouldn't really call Win95/98 stable...;-) on K6-2 with 350 MHz and up. On their Web-pages they admit that it's a software error, but they only provide fixes for the OEM service releases - not for the initial and quite expensive Win95 retail release. Instead they suggest to call their support line or to upgrade to Win98. In either case it means spending quite an amount of cash for a bugfix that should be a matter of course.
Posted by JoeyRamone:
Uuuuhhh,
Ever heard of MSCD (or somethin' like that). I believe it stands for Microsoft Certified Developer. I once took such a course (so you think I must know what I'm talking about)... It realy is about programming and not simply using a product.
That didn't make me a better programmer.
Posted by LazarusLong:
Don't ask, its a spoiler.
Posted by AnnoyingMouseCoward:
...is what the article said. Their software *could* have been ported to NT, but the article also mentioned that "...it would take several years..." to do so.
This is the fundemental problem with Win Anything. M$ programming languages are totally non-standard. Having to port a 2E+6 line program from Unix to NT would have been *nasty*, so it's pretty easy to see why they went to Linux instead.
Posted by AnnoyingMouseCoward:
I mean after all, can you be certain that you will be able to remember that you tied your shoe-laces up that morning when tour as old as he is?
Ken Thomson is one of the "tribal elders" of the *nix community. He might not be exatly with it these days, but that's just the way it is ok?
The next time he starts ranting and raving, just smile and nod your head and say "yes grandpa, you tell em grandpa" and refrain from snide and personal remarks, ok. Just remember - some day you'll be old as well.
Posted by The Mongolian Barbecue:
yeah _right_. I have seen both in action. YOu must be using the world's worse linux dist on a machine with half of its ram fried, and a vanilla nt box. give me a break. nt is a piece of shit with a capital s.
anyway, the fact that the source is open makes such an incredible fucking difference that they can't be compared solely on that basis. sometimes linux does stupid things- like one time it was allocating a shitload of dma class memory for apps that didn't need it, while I needed a good 2 megs to shovel data out to a high speed adc. the solution?- I simply allocated the buffers on kernel boot and locked them in place. obviously if I'd wanted more flexibility it would have been easy to do better than this. if this had occured in nt, forget about it. it would have been buy more ram, and pray to the gods of nt.
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
The phrase "begs the question" is more than the sum of it's parts.
It is a technical term from the field of logic and means that you have assumed what you set out to prove.
For instance, one favorite creationist argument against evolution is:
"The evolutionists tell us that they know the simpler organisms are older than the more complex ones because their fossils are in lower geologic strata.
But the geologists tell us that they know the lower geologic strata are older because they have simpler (and therefore older) fossils embedded in them.
This, (say the creationists) is begging the question."
Of course, that's not really what geologists and evolutionists say so the creationist rebuttal is moot, but they are right in thinking that this would be an invalid argument.
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
...but many of the encryption schemes I've seen rely on prime factorization being hard. And that's NP-complete.
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
The class of NP-hard problems are soluble in polynomial time on a non-deterministic Turing machine. A nondeterministic machine will explore many possible solutions in parallel.
Not just "many". A nondeterministic machine will explore all solutions in parallel.
That's what keeps NP-complete problems being cracked by parallel processors--you'd need to add more and more processors as the problem grew larger.
For instance, TSP (Travelling Salesman Problem): Having, say 10 processors only cuts my time by 10--but since the time grows exponentially this is pretty useless pretty soon.
But if I could build the machine AFTER I saw the problem (and add a processor for each city), I could solve it in poly-time--of course, building machines with 5x10^6 processors in pretty infeasible, so a non-parallel solution would be preferred.
Posted by Nick The Nerd:
There are obviously too many features if you can do something that many ways-and they are more or less equivalent.
--Ken Thompson, father of Unix
There's more than one way to do it.
--The Perl Motto
Posted by FascDot Killed My Previous Use:
No it doesn't "beg the question". Look that phrase up in a good logic book before you use it again.
Dammit.
I just read the article. At 80 million documents, I don't think my assertion is quite as valid.
Wow!