Interesting that you imply that there's something fishy about the US anti-Sony attitude. Like you (I assume from your name) I'm from NZ, and the attitude displayed on Slashdot re: Sony seems awfully like racism. Nothing else explains the blind vehment hatred. Microsoft have done much worse than Sony, yet they get a positively sweet ride on Slashdot compared to how Sony is treated.
Ulanoff clearly has an axe to grind - his past articles on Blu-Ray show that. No suprise that Slashbot morons were keen to pick up such ridiculous rubbish and run with it (AND the editors!!! WTF!?)
Compared to other countries, including Europe, Japan and many others, the US is *THE MOST* tolerant country for people who are different than ourselves.
Hhaaaaahahaahahahaha....
OMFG!!! Geez that's funny. Whooo! Let me catch my breath for a mo:o)
Hhaaaaahahaahahahaha....
Yeah, white cops beating up black guys, the US staging wars of aggression, US spitting on the UN, US trade protectionism, US ignoring the world court, "Sand Niggers", Guantanamo, executing your own citizens (but mainly black ones, it appears), the Monroe doctrine.
Yup, there's NOWHERE more tolerant than you! Hahaha... Hey, you do know that Europe isn't a country, right?
Anyway, I'm in no way anti American - I'm anti moron fuckwits like you. Not the same thing at all.
No, I mean the track record that includes the ps1 and ps2 - that dominated (and still dominate) the console market.
Don't be a dick - Microsoft has had more than one stupid idea up till now, that doesn't make the XBox any better or worse. Look up the term "Straw Man", you might learn something.
Yea, M$ loses money on Xbox, so what? They can afford to bleed cash, Sony cannot. SCE is the only (sometimes) profitable division of Sony while the other divisions are tanking. If SCE fails, Sony goes bye-bye. If M$ Home Entertainment Division fails, M$ moves on like nothing ever happened.
But since you are a shortsighted fool, I will put it to you simply - M$ is prepared to outspend Sony into the grave. The ridiculous over-engineering and the resulting price of PS3 is a result of this. And if M$ wants to, they can lop off another $100 from X360's price tag and it wouldn't even phase them.
M$ is aggressive, mean, and nasty, and they will bury Sony no matter what it costs them. Sony's time at the top is over. Deal with it.
Hmmmm. Sony is sitting on $US88 billion in assets, Seven Trillion Yen turnover per year, is actually making money from consoles and can afford to lose money on consoles to get blueray into living rooms and you think they're going to be sunk by Microsoft WHO HAVE NEVER SUCCEEDED IN ANY AREA WHERE THEY COULDN'T LEVERAGE THEIR O/S MONOPOLY???
You're in lala land.
Well, I'm not the one flying off the handle and cursing at people simply for delivering factual information.
No, I'm cursing you for ignoring the picture painted by the actual data you provided DUMB ASS. The data you used to show that Sony was sunk actually shows that Sony is making money on consoles while M$ - who you say will sink them - is actually pissing money down the drain.
Second, I don't give a rats ass about M$. I prefer the Wii, as it is the only console that supports next-generation gameplay. Fuck Xbox and fuck PS3.
I have even less interest in consoles - I'm a PC gamer through and through, but I watch the console market. I'm bewildered by rabid anti-Sony loons like you. I guess this is Slashdot, but I think you're taking your moron duties just a tad too far.
You fucking moron - those figures show M$ haemoraging cash while Sony is profitable most quarters. M$ has lost more money over the last three quarters and has never turned a profit ever bar one quarter back in 2004.
You also fucking ignore that they made a half billion profit the prior quarter.
I don't understand the extreme anti-Sony attitude that I've seen from US posters. Most people in the rest of the world are looking forward to the PS2 and think it'll do reasonably well.
The PS3 release price mentioned is considerably cheaper than the PS2 was initially released for in New Zealand - and that ended up being a top seller, hugely outselling the XBox. And that was when the XBox was technically superior. This time around, the PS3 is technically superior, it has backwards compatibility with PS1/2 - which has a huge installed user base. The stipped down PS3 doesn't lose any features most of us need (there's little HDTV in NZ) whereas all PS3 models come with a HD and BlueRay, which is a huge plus.
I'm not a console game fan - in fact, I hate console games (much prefer PC games), but I watch the games market, and I can't figure the US (especially/.) reaction against Sony and the PS3. It smacks of racism to me - I can only figure you Yanks are anti Japanese - the vitriol and hatred is beyond reasoned debate.
We have fanboys claiming BlueRay is a failure before it's even launched. Posters ignoring Sony's proven track record in this market and (weirdly) ignoring the 360's very poor sales figures. Sony *WILL* do well. They have a good product, they KNOW how to sell consoles. If the initial price is too high, it will drop quickly. The same happened with the PS2 and that was a huge success. Most people without an axe to grind expect that they will do well again.
The UN did NOT give you the authority to invade Iraq. The UN made a resolution which did not authorise the use of force and your corrupt government used that as an excuse to start a war of aggression.
...also bullshit is your claim about Halo being single platform game. For your information Einstein, there's a PC version of Halo and it is WAAAAY better than the XBOX version.
Good thing that the UN isn't controlling the internet and screwing it up. Yay for unbiased and good US capitalist concerns deciding universal infrastructure for the rest of the planet.
I like the fact that varied opinions arise on Digg. The selection of Slashdot's articles shows the obvious biases of the Slashdot editors. I agree with a previous poster that if/. wants to be free of complaints about editorial abuse, they should publish the rejected list. Even better would be to let users promote articles like Kuro5hin or Digg.
I moved to Netbeans from Eclipse. Eclipse *was* the best IDE in existence, bar none. I personally find that since NB4.1, Netbeans is a better IDE - at least for the work I do. I find it much easier to work with.
The fact is that NB has a good chunk of the IDE space and has been trending up recently. It's far from out of the picture.
It's also where innovation has been happening recently - Matisse, the UML and BIPL tools. Eclipse has been positively stagnant by comparison.
I agree with you - the Slashdot editors apply far too much of their own personal biases to what gets published here. Digg is much better in that regard (although their discussion lists are inferior to Slashdots)
If the editors could piss off and let users choose stories (like Digg or Kuro5hin), then Slashdot would be a lot less sucky in my opinion.
I agree that AJAX is not appropriate for writing a word processor, and I also agree that Java wasn't really intended for the server-side stuff it seems to be popular for now. And I agree that in theory Java applets should be used to create in-browser applications. Unfortunately, in practice Java applets are totally inadequate, even after all these years.
Really? In what way? Feel like justifying that in any way?
There is still no fast, totally cross-platform, bug-free GUI toolkit, with accessibility support and such.
Swing is all of that.
The funny thing is that browsers are full of bugs and AJAX applications usually have dozens if not hundreds of browser bug workarounds.
Which is exaactly why Ajax is a bad idea.
But in a Java applet, if your JRE has a bug, you're usually stuck.
Give an example. Find ANYTHING that is (a) a serious bug in the JRE and that (b) you couldn't work around. I remember a problem with date classes around Java 1.17 (7 years ago?), but recently? FUD again. Your argument is farcical - you point out that getting all browsers working consistenly is difficult then claim that Java is worse. Java is ONE product, and one which is utterly thrashed by industry - there's no way that major inconsistencies between core Java would be acceptable between versions or platforms.
JavaScript and modern browser DOMs have gotten flexible enough that it's actually possible to find a workaround for almost every bug imaginable.
And yet, amazingly, there's ALL these pages out there that DON'T actually work on multiple browsers. So, experience shows us that web apps are hard to get right, but Ajax is the way to go nevertheless, yet Java is bad for some undisclosed possible phantom reason that might occur maybe. Uh Huh. Oh well, this is Slashdot, I should expect this level of "reasoning"
You said "Java was designed to do just this [web applications] task."
I said that Java was designed for embedded apps (which it was)
You replied "Sun made a point of bringing Java bigwigs over to Pixar when they made Java's debut. At that time, they were pretty clear about being browser-embedded."
Yeah, I'm sure they did. They were pretty clear about it being garbarge collected, object oriented and the the answer to life the Universe and Everything, but there's a big difference about what something is designed for and how it is marketed.
You said "I agree that lots of people still use Java for server-side development. My employer supports them. But I've always felt that a VM on the server does not make very much sense. At this point, I would find it difficult to justify basing a new web project on Java. It's just too slow to develop. And Rails scalability doesn't seem to be an issue. Technocrat.net, which is built on Rails - by me alone - and uses a lot of caching, can service 850 pages per second with just one dispatcher process. Disabling the cache, we still get around 150 pages per second. We should be so lucky as to need to scale above that."
If rails gives you a quick solution in that domain, great. By all means, use the tool that suits you best. What I don't understand is the rationale of your 'VM on the server does not make very much sense' comment. Why not? What difference does it make?
What is it with fucking Mac benchmarks that the ONLY thing EVER reported on in performance tests is Photoshop? Surely Macs are general purpose computers with users who want to do more than run ONE FUCKING APP????
Slashdot Mirror
I agree. The Slashbots and /. Editors are showing their stripes.
This has gotten out of hand - it's disgusting.
Interesting that you imply that there's something fishy about the US anti-Sony attitude. Like you (I assume from your name) I'm from NZ, and the attitude displayed on Slashdot re: Sony seems awfully like racism. Nothing else explains the blind vehment hatred. Microsoft have done much worse than Sony, yet they get a positively sweet ride on Slashdot compared to how Sony is treated.
Ah, snap! I just posted the same thing. Slashdot seems a haven for knee-jerk reactionaries these days.
Especially when Slashdot posts such rubbish directly to the front page and then hides the retraction at the bottom of a Slashback section.
Editorial integrity on Slashdot is a JOKE.
Ulanoff clearly has an axe to grind - his past articles on Blu-Ray show that. No suprise that Slashbot morons were keen to pick up such ridiculous rubbish and run with it (AND the editors!!! WTF!?)
Could Slashbots BE any more eager to make up bullshit to trash Sony with? Good to see /.'s editorial integrity is keeping to its... high... standards.
Motorhead!!!
Fork != Clean Room Implementation
Compared to other countries, including Europe, Japan and many others, the US is *THE MOST* tolerant country for people who are different than ourselves.
:o)
Hhaaaaahahaahahahaha....
OMFG!!! Geez that's funny. Whooo! Let me catch my breath for a mo
Hhaaaaahahaahahahaha....
Yeah, white cops beating up black guys, the US staging wars of aggression, US spitting on the UN, US trade protectionism, US ignoring the world court, "Sand Niggers", Guantanamo, executing your own citizens (but mainly black ones, it appears), the Monroe doctrine.
Yup, there's NOWHERE more tolerant than you! Hahaha... Hey, you do know that Europe isn't a country, right?
Anyway, I'm in no way anti American - I'm anti moron fuckwits like you. Not the same thing at all.
No, I mean the track record that includes the ps1 and ps2 - that dominated (and still dominate) the console market.
Don't be a dick - Microsoft has had more than one stupid idea up till now, that doesn't make the XBox any better or worse. Look up the term "Straw Man", you might learn something.
Yea, M$ loses money on Xbox, so what? They can afford to bleed cash, Sony cannot. SCE is the only (sometimes) profitable division of Sony while the other divisions are tanking. If SCE fails, Sony goes bye-bye. If M$ Home Entertainment Division fails, M$ moves on like nothing ever happened.
But since you are a shortsighted fool, I will put it to you simply - M$ is prepared to outspend Sony into the grave. The ridiculous over-engineering and the resulting price of PS3 is a result of this. And if M$ wants to, they can lop off another $100 from X360's price tag and it wouldn't even phase them.
M$ is aggressive, mean, and nasty, and they will bury Sony no matter what it costs them. Sony's time at the top is over. Deal with it.
Hmmmm. Sony is sitting on $US88 billion in assets, Seven Trillion Yen turnover per year, is actually making money from consoles and can afford to lose money on consoles to get blueray into living rooms and you think they're going to be sunk by Microsoft WHO HAVE NEVER SUCCEEDED IN ANY AREA WHERE THEY COULDN'T LEVERAGE THEIR O/S MONOPOLY???
You're in lala land.
Well, I'm not the one flying off the handle and cursing at people simply for delivering factual information.
No, I'm cursing you for ignoring the picture painted by the actual data you provided DUMB ASS. The data you used to show that Sony was sunk actually shows that Sony is making money on consoles while M$ - who you say will sink them - is actually pissing money down the drain.
Second, I don't give a rats ass about M$. I prefer the Wii, as it is the only console that supports next-generation gameplay. Fuck Xbox and fuck PS3.
I have even less interest in consoles - I'm a PC gamer through and through, but I watch the console market. I'm bewildered by rabid anti-Sony loons like you. I guess this is Slashdot, but I think you're taking your moron duties just a tad too far.
You fucking moron - those figures show M$ haemoraging cash while Sony is profitable most quarters. M$ has lost more money over the last three quarters and has never turned a profit ever bar one quarter back in 2004.
You also fucking ignore that they made a half billion profit the prior quarter.
Can you say "FUCKING MORON FANBOY"???
I don't understand the extreme anti-Sony attitude that I've seen from US posters. Most people in the rest of the world are looking forward to the PS2 and think it'll do reasonably well.
/.) reaction against Sony and the PS3. It smacks of racism to me - I can only figure you Yanks are anti Japanese - the vitriol and hatred is beyond reasoned debate.
The PS3 release price mentioned is considerably cheaper than the PS2 was initially released for in New Zealand - and that ended up being a top seller, hugely outselling the XBox. And that was when the XBox was technically superior. This time around, the PS3 is technically superior, it has backwards compatibility with PS1/2 - which has a huge installed user base. The stipped down PS3 doesn't lose any features most of us need (there's little HDTV in NZ) whereas all PS3 models come with a HD and BlueRay, which is a huge plus.
I'm not a console game fan - in fact, I hate console games (much prefer PC games), but I watch the games market, and I can't figure the US (especially
We have fanboys claiming BlueRay is a failure before it's even launched. Posters ignoring Sony's proven track record in this market and (weirdly) ignoring the 360's very poor sales figures. Sony *WILL* do well. They have a good product, they KNOW how to sell consoles. If the initial price is too high, it will drop quickly. The same happened with the PS2 and that was a huge success. Most people without an axe to grind expect that they will do well again.
Guys, grow up.
The UN did NOT give you the authority to invade Iraq. The UN made a resolution which did not authorise the use of force and your corrupt government used that as an excuse to start a war of aggression.
...also bullshit is your claim about Halo being single platform game. For your information Einstein, there's a PC version of Halo and it is WAAAAY better than the XBOX version.
Bullshit. Here in New Zealand, I've seen plenty of shops with 360's sitting on the shelf gathering dust.
C# is NOT an open standard. ECMA "standards" can be patent-encumbered, which C# is.
Good thing that the UN isn't controlling the internet and screwing it up. Yay for unbiased and good US capitalist concerns deciding universal infrastructure for the rest of the planet.
I like the fact that varied opinions arise on Digg. The selection of Slashdot's articles shows the obvious biases of the Slashdot editors. I agree with a previous poster that if /. wants to be free of complaints about editorial abuse, they should publish the rejected list. Even better would be to let users promote articles like Kuro5hin or Digg.
I hated HL2 after about 30 minutes. Dull as fucking dishwater - it's a shooter on rails. So what if it's pretty and has physics? Pretty != fun.
I moved to Netbeans from Eclipse. Eclipse *was* the best IDE in existence, bar none. I personally find that since NB4.1, Netbeans is a better IDE - at least for the work I do. I find it much easier to work with.
The fact is that NB has a good chunk of the IDE space and has been trending up recently. It's far from out of the picture.
It's also where innovation has been happening recently - Matisse, the UML and BIPL tools. Eclipse has been positively stagnant by comparison.
I agree with you - the Slashdot editors apply far too much of their own personal biases to what gets published here. Digg is much better in that regard (although their discussion lists are inferior to Slashdots)
If the editors could piss off and let users choose stories (like Digg or Kuro5hin), then Slashdot would be a lot less sucky in my opinion.
I agree that AJAX is not appropriate for writing a word processor, and I also agree that Java wasn't really intended for the server-side stuff it seems to be popular for now. And I agree that in theory Java applets should be used to create in-browser applications. Unfortunately, in practice Java applets are totally inadequate, even after all these years.
Really? In what way? Feel like justifying that in any way?
There is still no fast, totally cross-platform, bug-free GUI toolkit, with accessibility support and such.
Swing is all of that.
The funny thing is that browsers are full of bugs and AJAX applications usually have dozens if not hundreds of browser bug workarounds.
Which is exaactly why Ajax is a bad idea.
But in a Java applet, if your JRE has a bug, you're usually stuck.
Give an example. Find ANYTHING that is (a) a serious bug in the JRE and that (b) you couldn't work around. I remember a problem with date classes around Java 1.17 (7 years ago?), but recently? FUD again. Your argument is farcical - you point out that getting all browsers working consistenly is difficult then claim that Java is worse. Java is ONE product, and one which is utterly thrashed by industry - there's no way that major inconsistencies between core Java would be acceptable between versions or platforms.
JavaScript and modern browser DOMs have gotten flexible enough that it's actually possible to find a workaround for almost every bug imaginable.
And yet, amazingly, there's ALL these pages out there that DON'T actually work on multiple browsers. So, experience shows us that web apps are hard to get right, but Ajax is the way to go nevertheless, yet Java is bad for some undisclosed possible phantom reason that might occur maybe. Uh Huh. Oh well, this is Slashdot, I should expect this level of "reasoning"
You said "Java was designed to do just this [web applications] task."
I said that Java was designed for embedded apps (which it was)
You replied "Sun made a point of bringing Java bigwigs over to Pixar when they made Java's debut. At that time, they were pretty clear about being browser-embedded."
Yeah, I'm sure they did. They were pretty clear about it being garbarge collected, object oriented and the the answer to life the Universe and Everything, but there's a big difference about what something is designed for and how it is marketed.
You said "I agree that lots of people still use Java for server-side development. My employer supports them. But I've always felt that a VM on the server does not make very much sense. At this point, I would find it difficult to justify basing a new web project on Java. It's just too slow to develop. And Rails scalability doesn't seem to be an issue. Technocrat.net, which is built on Rails - by me alone - and uses a lot of caching, can service 850 pages per second with just one dispatcher process. Disabling the cache, we still get around 150 pages per second. We should be so lucky as to need to scale above that."
If rails gives you a quick solution in that domain, great. By all means, use the tool that suits you best. What I don't understand is the rationale of your 'VM on the server does not make very much sense' comment. Why not? What difference does it make?
What is it with fucking Mac benchmarks that the ONLY thing EVER reported on in performance tests is Photoshop? Surely Macs are general purpose computers with users who want to do more than run ONE FUCKING APP????