Gamecubes also use PowerPC chips, but Nintendo is being so tight-lipped about the next-gen "Revolution" system that nobody knows what its specs will be.
Incidentally, this is one of the criticisms against the PC world made by Apple users. No hodge-podge of duplicate-priced parts from all over the place. Just order what you see at the Apple Store, customized if you want.
To be honest, part of it was the latter. I don't consider OS X truly usable up until the 10.2 Jaguar release.
It was a totally new operating system replacement for Apple after over a decade of trying, and they rushed it out as quickly as they could just to stay alive (iPods weren't out yet, so they were living off the iMacs). All is forgiven now, especially considering the fantastic technology they had to inherit and integrate. Jaguar was the sweet spot where they finally got it right.
You can even access the Cocoa API via Applescript and create an actual app with it. It's a great little tool. Looking forward to Automator to speed things up for newbies.
The problem with that is that anyone who has used a P2P client for more than a week knows that the majority of traffic is illegal trading. There simply isn't that much legal music out there being put on P2P compared to album, movie, and software rips.
Nobody has to take my word for it. Fire up eMule or Bittorrent and see for yourself. I don't see very many "legal music tracker" sites out there, but there sure are a lot of underground illegal tracker sites.
Copyright infringment means copying Doom 3, which is different from taking [a copy of] it.
Um, if you're copying Doom 3, you are taking a copy of it. Use whatever word you want--receiving a copy, obtaining a copy, it doesn't matter. You're taking a copy of Doom 3.
I believe the endless battle over the precise semantics used to describe software piracy is a distraction some people put up to avoid the real debate about the immorality of the behavior in the first place. Just my opinion.
You're not saying why it's obvious (apparently it isn't obvious enough for the parent, or for me, or for most people for that matter). You're even using the language you're trying to defend in your argument, which is classical circular reasoning.
I don't need to say why it's obvious. If you don't think it's obvious that taking something from someone that they are selling without reimbursing them for it--even if you're able to produce a pristine binary copy instead of taking something tangible--is immoral, there is nothing I can say to convince you anyway. You've already justified piracy in your mind to the point that any sort of debate doesn't make a dent.
You may as well start asking people why it's immoral to go around slugging people in the face. It's one of those brain-dead obvious things. I respect if you disagree about the way the music industry behaves, but I don't respect if you can't explain why taking something from someone that they are selling is the non-obvious case (not immoral) instead of the obvious case (immoral).
Again, if there is nothing immoral about copyright infringement on P2P, then there is nothing immoral about taking GPL code and doing whatever the hell you want with it regardless of what the GPL says. You can't pick and choose moralities.
Take OSX. Why do people need the dual G5s? Well, its for that fancy gui and shite. If you take that away those boxes are fast as hell. They eat up their cycles with pretty pictures.
Wow, so all this time that those effects have been offloaded from the CPU to the GPU using an OpenGL compositor, it was just an illusion?
Why do people need the dual G5s? For high-end work. Such as making movies like "The Incredibles." Pixar uses Macs, as do the rest of Apple's beloved "creative class" that those dual-G5s are targetted for.
Congratulations on mentioning three stock Slashdot criticisms, one of which existed only once as an add-on product over ten years ago, another that hasn't been in a stock Office install for four years now, and a third that is easily shut off with the click of the mouse.
Honestly, what is the obsession with Microsoft Bob and Clippy around here? I don't get it or find it funny.
A lot of people like to wax nostalgic about the good ol' days when things were faster, all the while ignoring the featuresets implemented today. The fact is, yesteryear's code wasn't as advanced or featured. A word processor from ten years ago may have been pretty damned fast, but today's word processors load dictionaries to spellcheck your document and grammar as you type and import graphics.
Windows 3.1 may have been incredibly snappy, but it also lacked propery memory protection, wasn't 32-bit addressed, and didn't provide an intuitive interface. Also, more advanced typography (anti-aliasing) and filesystem indexing services like Spotlight come into play, as well as all the important system daemons running in the background that are now considered stock.
It's not that things aren't getting any faster because of bloat. It's because as power increases, the ability to add new modern features to the original experience is utilizing that extra power, just as it should.
What's incompatible about those versions of Windows? All my apps still run, going back to the Windows 3.1 versions. In fact, the massive compatibility layer and bending-over-backward to make things run in Windows is what has made it so unstable, and why they're replacing Win32.
I guarantee you over 90% of most applications going back to Windows 95 will happily run on XP. Your nephew's game that wouldn't run on 98? Bogus. Name it.
If your Windows 3.1, 95, or 98 app doesn't run on XP, chances are you were misleading and not pointing out that it's a DOS app. XP is based on the NT kernel, not DOS.
Those aren't forks anyway. A fork is a branching that continues to be developed alongside. Those are newer versions of the same product. Unless you think Linux 2.4 and 2.6 are "forks?" I can't run 2.4-era RPMs on today's Red Hat machines.
If you want to say that copyright infringment is immoral behavior, you have to make that argument. Not declare the case closed by calling it "stealing" and ridiculing anyone who objects to the metaphor.
Nobody defines it becuause it's brain-dead obvious. The fact you've clouded your own mindset to the point you feel it's not obvious is telling. For instance, taking Doom 3 without paying for it is immoral. A lot of people spent years working on that game to make a living, and you're taking it while not paying for it--that makes it immoral.
It's brain-dead obvious.
These are basic concepts of right and wrong taught when we're three years old. This moral relativism, pro-piracy spiel I sometimes see on Slashdot where "I'm so used to the convenience of downloading that I've justified it in my mind so that I'm not doing anything wrong" is pretty childish. Funny how this attitude disappears when Slashdot posts articles about companies using GPL source code. Not only is it referred to as "stolen" code, but the companies are dumped on for violating the GPL copyright! By your reasoning, why should anybody follow the GPL? What's wrong with breaking it?
This generation of computer users seems to be all about "Gimme that, it's mine! Gimme that, it's mine!" The sense of entitlement is amusing and creates these sorts of hypocritical situations.
People demonize the RIAA in order to remove the guilt they feel and paint someone else as the bad guy doing wrong in order to justify their actions.
p2p can be used for many legitimate purposes.
But 99% of the time, it's not.
Why would someone on a P2P network worry about downloads being logged by the servers if they weren't trading anything illegal? Come on, we're not stupid. I wouldn't give a crap if some Kazaa server recorded that I shared Slackware 10.1. Did you know--gasp--Slashdot is logging your actions on its site right now? Horrors!
Yes some people who write games are still concerne with assembly as are people in embedded markets. But those jobs, situations and skills are niche, much like the Win32 programming I used to do in the early 90's.
I'm sorry, but I never agree when people say fonts on Linux look good. For instance, take a look at the "W" characters in those shots. The diagonal lines in that letter are thicker than the others. It also happens in certain digits and special characters. Diagonal lines and curves in general are uneven. People often tell me the fonts in Linux render better than in Windows, and I just look at comparison shots between the two and shake my head at their apparent delusions, especially when comparing to a shot from OS X (probably the best I've seen from any OS...everything is smoothed, and somehow it antialiases very tiny characters without making them appear too thick or too thin).
If you want, you can even have the best of both worlds and dual boot Linux and OS X on your a Mac mini.:) Better yet, you can even run KDE and GNOME through X11, in OS X.
Why would someone buy this for a $500 computer? Because the Mac mini is not seen as just a computer, it's seen as a gadget, like the iPod.
It's like asking why people would dress up that piece of machinery outside that sits on four wheels and takes them to work. It's just a car! But people like things to look and feel good to use. The PC world still hasn't caught up to the idea of the computer as an appliance you'd actually want sitting in your living room, so we continue to get those big ugly black/beige towers that look the same as they did ten and fifteen years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
Gamecubes also use PowerPC chips, but Nintendo is being so tight-lipped about the next-gen "Revolution" system that nobody knows what its specs will be.
Incidentally, this is one of the criticisms against the PC world made by Apple users. No hodge-podge of duplicate-priced parts from all over the place. Just order what you see at the Apple Store, customized if you want.
To be honest, part of it was the latter. I don't consider OS X truly usable up until the 10.2 Jaguar release.
It was a totally new operating system replacement for Apple after over a decade of trying, and they rushed it out as quickly as they could just to stay alive (iPods weren't out yet, so they were living off the iMacs). All is forgiven now, especially considering the fantastic technology they had to inherit and integrate. Jaguar was the sweet spot where they finally got it right.
Well, if you lack the ability to understand the syntax of a language, you probably wouldn't be programming a computer anyway, would you?
You can even access the Cocoa API via Applescript and create an actual app with it. It's a great little tool. Looking forward to Automator to speed things up for newbies.
The problem with that is that anyone who has used a P2P client for more than a week knows that the majority of traffic is illegal trading. There simply isn't that much legal music out there being put on P2P compared to album, movie, and software rips.
Nobody has to take my word for it. Fire up eMule or Bittorrent and see for yourself. I don't see very many "legal music tracker" sites out there, but there sure are a lot of underground illegal tracker sites.
Copyright infringment means copying Doom 3, which is different from taking [a copy of] it.
Um, if you're copying Doom 3, you are taking a copy of it. Use whatever word you want--receiving a copy, obtaining a copy, it doesn't matter. You're taking a copy of Doom 3.
I believe the endless battle over the precise semantics used to describe software piracy is a distraction some people put up to avoid the real debate about the immorality of the behavior in the first place. Just my opinion.
You're not saying why it's obvious (apparently it isn't obvious enough for the parent, or for me, or for most people for that matter). You're even using the language you're trying to defend in your argument, which is classical circular reasoning.
I don't need to say why it's obvious. If you don't think it's obvious that taking something from someone that they are selling without reimbursing them for it--even if you're able to produce a pristine binary copy instead of taking something tangible--is immoral, there is nothing I can say to convince you anyway. You've already justified piracy in your mind to the point that any sort of debate doesn't make a dent.
You may as well start asking people why it's immoral to go around slugging people in the face. It's one of those brain-dead obvious things. I respect if you disagree about the way the music industry behaves, but I don't respect if you can't explain why taking something from someone that they are selling is the non-obvious case (not immoral) instead of the obvious case (immoral).
Again, if there is nothing immoral about copyright infringement on P2P, then there is nothing immoral about taking GPL code and doing whatever the hell you want with it regardless of what the GPL says. You can't pick and choose moralities.
"Microsquat?" "HAY BILL?"
:P
It's nice to have such eloquently spoken advocates on our side.
Take OSX. Why do people need the dual G5s? Well, its for that fancy gui and shite. If you take that away those boxes are fast as hell. They eat up their cycles with pretty pictures.
Wow, so all this time that those effects have been offloaded from the CPU to the GPU using an OpenGL compositor, it was just an illusion?
Why do people need the dual G5s? For high-end work. Such as making movies like "The Incredibles." Pixar uses Macs, as do the rest of Apple's beloved "creative class" that those dual-G5s are targetted for.
Congratulations on mentioning three stock Slashdot criticisms, one of which existed only once as an add-on product over ten years ago, another that hasn't been in a stock Office install for four years now, and a third that is easily shut off with the click of the mouse.
Honestly, what is the obsession with Microsoft Bob and Clippy around here? I don't get it or find it funny.
A lot of people like to wax nostalgic about the good ol' days when things were faster, all the while ignoring the featuresets implemented today. The fact is, yesteryear's code wasn't as advanced or featured. A word processor from ten years ago may have been pretty damned fast, but today's word processors load dictionaries to spellcheck your document and grammar as you type and import graphics.
Windows 3.1 may have been incredibly snappy, but it also lacked propery memory protection, wasn't 32-bit addressed, and didn't provide an intuitive interface. Also, more advanced typography (anti-aliasing) and filesystem indexing services like Spotlight come into play, as well as all the important system daemons running in the background that are now considered stock.
It's not that things aren't getting any faster because of bloat. It's because as power increases, the ability to add new modern features to the original experience is utilizing that extra power, just as it should.
Does that mean Linux 2.0, 2.4, and 2.6 are forks?
What's incompatible about those versions of Windows? All my apps still run, going back to the Windows 3.1 versions. In fact, the massive compatibility layer and bending-over-backward to make things run in Windows is what has made it so unstable, and why they're replacing Win32.
I guarantee you over 90% of most applications going back to Windows 95 will happily run on XP. Your nephew's game that wouldn't run on 98? Bogus. Name it.
If your Windows 3.1, 95, or 98 app doesn't run on XP, chances are you were misleading and not pointing out that it's a DOS app. XP is based on the NT kernel, not DOS.
Those aren't forks anyway. A fork is a branching that continues to be developed alongside. Those are newer versions of the same product. Unless you think Linux 2.4 and 2.6 are "forks?" I can't run 2.4-era RPMs on today's Red Hat machines.
Translation:
"I like KDE better than GNOME. I see that you don't. Why on Earth don't you stop punishing yourself and just follow my viewpoint instead of your own?"
Why not use KDE? Well, why is your favorite color your favorite color? It's called personal opinion, putz!
As opposed to what? Putting Linux on it? :P
If you want to say that copyright infringment is immoral behavior, you have to make that argument. Not declare the case closed by calling it "stealing" and ridiculing anyone who objects to the metaphor.
Nobody defines it becuause it's brain-dead obvious. The fact you've clouded your own mindset to the point you feel it's not obvious is telling. For instance, taking Doom 3 without paying for it is immoral. A lot of people spent years working on that game to make a living, and you're taking it while not paying for it--that makes it immoral.
It's brain-dead obvious.
These are basic concepts of right and wrong taught when we're three years old. This moral relativism, pro-piracy spiel I sometimes see on Slashdot where "I'm so used to the convenience of downloading that I've justified it in my mind so that I'm not doing anything wrong" is pretty childish. Funny how this attitude disappears when Slashdot posts articles about companies using GPL source code. Not only is it referred to as "stolen" code, but the companies are dumped on for violating the GPL copyright! By your reasoning, why should anybody follow the GPL? What's wrong with breaking it?
This generation of computer users seems to be all about "Gimme that, it's mine! Gimme that, it's mine!" The sense of entitlement is amusing and creates these sorts of hypocritical situations.
You're as bad as the xxIA.
People demonize the RIAA in order to remove the guilt they feel and paint someone else as the bad guy doing wrong in order to justify their actions.
p2p can be used for many legitimate purposes.
But 99% of the time, it's not.
Why would someone on a P2P network worry about downloads being logged by the servers if they weren't trading anything illegal? Come on, we're not stupid. I wouldn't give a crap if some Kazaa server recorded that I shared Slackware 10.1. Did you know--gasp--Slashdot is logging your actions on its site right now? Horrors!
Yes some people who write games are still concerne with assembly as are people in embedded markets. But those jobs, situations and skills are niche, much like the Win32 programming I used to do in the early 90's.
I don't consider Doom 3 to be a niche.
And for those curious, it's more pronounced in these shots: http://www.gnome.org/~davyd/gnome-2-10/.
. php?release=234&slide=32. See the word "IDE?" The D characters have uneven line widths on their curves. They thicken right at the diagonal parts.
Hell, look at this--http://shots.osdir.com/slideshows/slideshow
I'm sorry, but I never agree when people say fonts on Linux look good. For instance, take a look at the "W" characters in those shots. The diagonal lines in that letter are thicker than the others. It also happens in certain digits and special characters. Diagonal lines and curves in general are uneven. People often tell me the fonts in Linux render better than in Windows, and I just look at comparison shots between the two and shake my head at their apparent delusions, especially when comparing to a shot from OS X (probably the best I've seen from any OS...everything is smoothed, and somehow it antialiases very tiny characters without making them appear too thick or too thin).
If you want, you can even have the best of both worlds and dual boot Linux and OS X on your a Mac mini. :) Better yet, you can even run KDE and GNOME through X11, in OS X.
You will feel your geek penis grow...
The point is that this is just the beginning.
Why would someone buy this for a $500 computer? Because the Mac mini is not seen as just a computer, it's seen as a gadget, like the iPod.
It's like asking why people would dress up that piece of machinery outside that sits on four wheels and takes them to work. It's just a car! But people like things to look and feel good to use. The PC world still hasn't caught up to the idea of the computer as an appliance you'd actually want sitting in your living room, so we continue to get those big ugly black/beige towers that look the same as they did ten and fifteen years ago.
about the only thing i feel it's missing is a radio.
And because of the burgeoning iPod accessory market, you can have radios too! Even guitar amps and voice recorders...
"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame." -- CmdrTaco on day of iPod launch, 2001