I'm king of off topic here (be kind moderators) but I was just wondering: where does everyone buy their computer components online? I check pricewatch all the time, but you can never get good deals on more than one part from the same vendor, so when you add in shipping on each individual piece coming from ten different locations, you're not really saving that much.
Try removing your head from your ass *before* speaking. This has ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING to do with monopolistic practices. The fact that a website isn't accessible to some people isn't an unfair business practice. It's a damn news portal. If you're that upset about it, go use yahoo. Forcing people to install your browser with your os is leveraging a monopoly. Forcing OEMs into contracts that exclude them from installing other os's besides yours is leveraging a monopoly. Keeping people out of your website based on what browser they use may be stupid, but it's by no means leveraging a monopoly. MS doesn't have a monopoly on web news portals to leverage in the first place. It may be stupid, childish, and under-handed, but it's not monopolistic.
They aren't exactly forcing anyone to use IE. Nobody's forcing you to go to MSN. If I run an auto shop and tell you I only repair GM vehicles, you're not obligated to go buy a GM car just so you have one to bring to my shop. MSN is a news portal. If you don't want to follow their rules, don't visit the site. It's not like they're the only game in town. If you like the news, use IE (which is a pointless argument now that they've changed it, but the moral of the story's still the same)
My reaction to this is the same as my reaction to the MSN debacle: who cares? Chances are, 99.9% of people using MSN were using it from IE anyways. We sign up for free reg at NY Times, why can't MS ask the same thing? You want our service, you do it by our conditions. Same thing here. It's *his* mailing list - if he wants to make "non-MS email client" a condition of membership, go for it. If you don't like it, don't use it. It's a FREE service, so you really have no right to bitch. Besides, it's not like he's using it for evil - it does no damage other than making the email illegible.
On the same lines, you could use the SMC Barricade. Their website actually gives you different tweaks you need to make to the setting to get it to work on different providers (Rogers @Home in Canada needed a few special tweaks, but it works like a charm and stays online for months on end)
We should all go buy old crappy games from pawnshop bargain bins for $4.99, scratch 'em up with a key, and ship them in for replacements. When none of them get replaced, we could try to pool our efforts on a class action suit.
All shows on the Furthur Network are 100% MD5 verified! When users initially share a show, Furthur will run an MD5 verification check, to ensure the file integrity. If any file doesn't check out, Furthur won't allow it on the network
This gives them a lot of control over network content. Don't want something on the network? Pull it's MD5 sum from your database.
You're right. Without a modchip I can't play pirated games. I can't play them without a TV either, so is that next to go? The TVs original intention wasn't to let me play pirated PS2 games, but it's certainly an integral part of the process. Same with DVD burners. I'm glad to see Sony trying to reduce piracy and keep costs lower for those of us NOT stealing thier games, but I think this is the wrong way to go about it. Setting a precedent of banning something that *could* be used to pirate software is all bad.
Isn't crap like this covered in the warranty? Like, if you screw with it, you void the warranty. It's the same as GM telling me that if I decide to put an aftermarket stereo in my car then it's my own problem if it shorts out the whole electrical system. They don't really care what I do to the car because they're no longer obliged to fix it for me once I've voided the warranty. If I'd been warned before purchasing my PS2 that even though I *purchased* it, I had no right to do with it as I saw fit, I probably wouldn't have bought it. This isn't about software or IP or any sort of difficult grey area, this is a tangible product. I buy it, I own it. That's how it's always been, and I don't see how they can change that.
Suppressing competition to control price? Sounds to me like a monopolistic practice. (yeah, I know...that word gets thrown around waaaaaay too much on slashdot). Anybody know what kinds of laws EU has on monopolies, and if any case can be made the they're only doing what they're doing to artificially inflate prices by controlling supply?
That seems to me like trying to outlaw a broadband connection on the grounds that it *could* be used for downloading pirated software. Or, hell...banning anything that may enable piracy: cd burners, hiew (and windasm, and softice, and whatever other software the kids these days use), hard drives, computers, blah blah blah. Just because it *can* be used for piracy, doesn't mean it will be. Seems to me that right now the cost of dvd burners and media is too prohibitive to make it worthwhile to be pirating ps2 games. And if the original intent of the modchip is stated to be for playing import games and one's own personal backups, how can the court tell me "we know you'll use it for illegal purposes, so you can't have it"? Sounds kinda unfair to me.
I normally ignore ACs, but hey...I'm here. Whether you go by pricewatch (as I chose to do) or CompUSA or the scary man wearing 40 lbs of gold chains selling OEM shit out of the back of a van in the alley behind the barber shop, you'll come up the same. For the same dollar ammount, you'll get a much faster Athlon. The Athlon XP 2000 is actually *cheaper* than a P4 1.9 Ghz, and all benchmarks I've seen show that the Athlon can outperform a 1.9 Ghz Intel. From what I've seen, the 2.2 Ghz P4 is at least twice the cost of the Athlon 2000. So yeah, I don't care about cost, since I'm not in the market for either, I just want to see whose top of the line processor performs better. If the Athlon wins, great, since it's way cheaper. If the Intel wins, does it win by enough to make it worth double the dollars? THAT'S what *I* care about.
Bah, we could do this for days on end. But while "normal" folk may never buy a 15,000 rpm scsi drive, the linuxhardware.org folk are hardly normal. That said, they *could* choose to build the total high end system, but I seriously doubt that it would effect the outcome of the testing. If both systems use the same high speed scsi hard drive, the systems will greatly improve, but both should show the same improvements, and thus there's no difference. But hey, if you're buying, I'll take 15,000 rpm 100 Gb drive any day;).
p.s. - I would love to see a comparison done with a TCO sort of thing. Sure, the AMD is less than half the price of the Intel, but is the install and config longer? Is it *really* more likely to die? Put together the best P4 and Athlon XP systems you can for, say, $2,000, including build time (set a rate for billing techs) and see who comes out on top. THEN you can do the benchmarks.
I agree with you one hundred percent. I'm currently trying to build myself a new system and constantly weighing options. However, from what I can tell from the story on slashdot (linuxhardware.com is *still* inaccessible) the testers were simply comparing the processors. You can always add more bells and whistles, but plugging high-end scsi drives into both systems *shouldn't* produce a larger performance gap on the test systems. The point I was originally making is that this test isn't to see if you get more performance out of AMD or Intel based on the same budget - it's to see which company's top of the line processor performs better on relatively similar hardware. We could put an 80Gb, 15,000 rpm scsi harddrive on both. Hell, we could add a dvd burner and a twelve foot flat screen monitor, but it won't change the system performance of one system relative to the other (or at least it shouldn't).
But the test isn't about biggest bang for your buck...AMD wins that test hands down every time. The test is about comparing performance. If we had to do it by dollars, we'd be running the Athlon 2000 XP against a P4 1.9Ghz (according to pricewatch).
I'm beginning to wonder why every politicians response to gang violence is to force children into the streets so that they have nothing to do other than join a gang. Maybe they could try to watch over the kids a little better, or (heaven forbid) let the parents watch them. But then again, if you don't care if your kid's hanging around with street gangs at an internet cafe until 8pm, will you even notice that they're with the same street gang, wandering around looking for trouble, until 1am?
I was thinking about the car stereo idea too. For the $109 plus shipping it costs for this thing, I think I may pick one up and try to hook it into my car somehow. If anyone has any suggestions, post 'em before I destroy my car;)
of course others thought that. but if you comment negatively on something one of the editors said/did, you can expect to see just how infinite their mod points are. damn bitchslaps. so we all just fall in line to preserve our karma.
why do us mac users always get shafted on games, and instead only get stuff like photoshop and illustrator that work properly, unlike windows that gets broken graphics apps and all the games? what's with that?
btw, if you want games, get a ps2...much better than a win box;)
Slashdot Mirror
...awww, fuck it.
I'm king of off topic here (be kind moderators) but I was just wondering: where does everyone buy their computer components online? I check pricewatch all the time, but you can never get good deals on more than one part from the same vendor, so when you add in shipping on each individual piece coming from ten different locations, you're not really saving that much.
Try removing your head from your ass *before* speaking. This has ABSOLUTLEY NOTHING to do with monopolistic practices. The fact that a website isn't accessible to some people isn't an unfair business practice. It's a damn news portal. If you're that upset about it, go use yahoo. Forcing people to install your browser with your os is leveraging a monopoly. Forcing OEMs into contracts that exclude them from installing other os's besides yours is leveraging a monopoly. Keeping people out of your website based on what browser they use may be stupid, but it's by no means leveraging a monopoly. MS doesn't have a monopoly on web news portals to leverage in the first place. It may be stupid, childish, and under-handed, but it's not monopolistic.
They aren't exactly forcing anyone to use IE. Nobody's forcing you to go to MSN. If I run an auto shop and tell you I only repair GM vehicles, you're not obligated to go buy a GM car just so you have one to bring to my shop. MSN is a news portal. If you don't want to follow their rules, don't visit the site. It's not like they're the only game in town. If you like the news, use IE (which is a pointless argument now that they've changed it, but the moral of the story's still the same)
My reaction to this is the same as my reaction to the MSN debacle: who cares? Chances are, 99.9% of people using MSN were using it from IE anyways. We sign up for free reg at NY Times, why can't MS ask the same thing? You want our service, you do it by our conditions. Same thing here. It's *his* mailing list - if he wants to make "non-MS email client" a condition of membership, go for it. If you don't like it, don't use it. It's a FREE service, so you really have no right to bitch. Besides, it's not like he's using it for evil - it does no damage other than making the email illegible.
On the same lines, you could use the SMC Barricade. Their website actually gives you different tweaks you need to make to the setting to get it to work on different providers (Rogers @Home in Canada needed a few special tweaks, but it works like a charm and stays online for months on end)
We should all go buy old crappy games from pawnshop bargain bins for $4.99, scratch 'em up with a key, and ship them in for replacements. When none of them get replaced, we could try to pool our efforts on a class action suit.
from furthur's website:
All shows on the Furthur Network are 100% MD5 verified! When users initially share a show, Furthur will run an MD5 verification check, to ensure the file integrity. If any file doesn't check out, Furthur won't allow it on the network
This gives them a lot of control over network content. Don't want something on the network? Pull it's MD5 sum from your database.
You're right. Without a modchip I can't play pirated games. I can't play them without a TV either, so is that next to go? The TVs original intention wasn't to let me play pirated PS2 games, but it's certainly an integral part of the process. Same with DVD burners. I'm glad to see Sony trying to reduce piracy and keep costs lower for those of us NOT stealing thier games, but I think this is the wrong way to go about it. Setting a precedent of banning something that *could* be used to pirate software is all bad.
Isn't crap like this covered in the warranty? Like, if you screw with it, you void the warranty. It's the same as GM telling me that if I decide to put an aftermarket stereo in my car then it's my own problem if it shorts out the whole electrical system. They don't really care what I do to the car because they're no longer obliged to fix it for me once I've voided the warranty. If I'd been warned before purchasing my PS2 that even though I *purchased* it, I had no right to do with it as I saw fit, I probably wouldn't have bought it. This isn't about software or IP or any sort of difficult grey area, this is a tangible product. I buy it, I own it. That's how it's always been, and I don't see how they can change that.
Suppressing competition to control price? Sounds to me like a monopolistic practice. (yeah, I know...that word gets thrown around waaaaaay too much on slashdot). Anybody know what kinds of laws EU has on monopolies, and if any case can be made the they're only doing what they're doing to artificially inflate prices by controlling supply?
That seems to me like trying to outlaw a broadband connection on the grounds that it *could* be used for downloading pirated software. Or, hell...banning anything that may enable piracy: cd burners, hiew (and windasm, and softice, and whatever other software the kids these days use), hard drives, computers, blah blah blah. Just because it *can* be used for piracy, doesn't mean it will be. Seems to me that right now the cost of dvd burners and media is too prohibitive to make it worthwhile to be pirating ps2 games. And if the original intent of the modchip is stated to be for playing import games and one's own personal backups, how can the court tell me "we know you'll use it for illegal purposes, so you can't have it"? Sounds kinda unfair to me.
I normally ignore ACs, but hey...I'm here. Whether you go by pricewatch (as I chose to do) or CompUSA or the scary man wearing 40 lbs of gold chains selling OEM shit out of the back of a van in the alley behind the barber shop, you'll come up the same. For the same dollar ammount, you'll get a much faster Athlon. The Athlon XP 2000 is actually *cheaper* than a P4 1.9 Ghz, and all benchmarks I've seen show that the Athlon can outperform a 1.9 Ghz Intel. From what I've seen, the 2.2 Ghz P4 is at least twice the cost of the Athlon 2000. So yeah, I don't care about cost, since I'm not in the market for either, I just want to see whose top of the line processor performs better. If the Athlon wins, great, since it's way cheaper. If the Intel wins, does it win by enough to make it worth double the dollars? THAT'S what *I* care about.
Bah, we could do this for days on end. But while "normal" folk may never buy a 15,000 rpm scsi drive, the linuxhardware.org folk are hardly normal. That said, they *could* choose to build the total high end system, but I seriously doubt that it would effect the outcome of the testing. If both systems use the same high speed scsi hard drive, the systems will greatly improve, but both should show the same improvements, and thus there's no difference. But hey, if you're buying, I'll take 15,000 rpm 100 Gb drive any day ;).
p.s. - I would love to see a comparison done with a TCO sort of thing. Sure, the AMD is less than half the price of the Intel, but is the install and config longer? Is it *really* more likely to die? Put together the best P4 and Athlon XP systems you can for, say, $2,000, including build time (set a rate for billing techs) and see who comes out on top. THEN you can do the benchmarks.
er, I guess that's linuxhardware.ORG, not .COM
I know, I know...READ THE ARTICLE, and don't reply to my own posts, or something...
I agree with you one hundred percent. I'm currently trying to build myself a new system and constantly weighing options. However, from what I can tell from the story on slashdot (linuxhardware.com is *still* inaccessible) the testers were simply comparing the processors. You can always add more bells and whistles, but plugging high-end scsi drives into both systems *shouldn't* produce a larger performance gap on the test systems. The point I was originally making is that this test isn't to see if you get more performance out of AMD or Intel based on the same budget - it's to see which company's top of the line processor performs better on relatively similar hardware. We could put an 80Gb, 15,000 rpm scsi harddrive on both. Hell, we could add a dvd burner and a twelve foot flat screen monitor, but it won't change the system performance of one system relative to the other (or at least it shouldn't).
But the test isn't about biggest bang for your buck...AMD wins that test hands down every time. The test is about comparing performance. If we had to do it by dollars, we'd be running the Athlon 2000 XP against a P4 1.9Ghz (according to pricewatch).
I'm beginning to wonder why every politicians response to gang violence is to force children into the streets so that they have nothing to do other than join a gang. Maybe they could try to watch over the kids a little better, or (heaven forbid) let the parents watch them. But then again, if you don't care if your kid's hanging around with street gangs at an internet cafe until 8pm, will you even notice that they're with the same street gang, wandering around looking for trouble, until 1am?
I'm sorry but it's just a big red box.
What's not sexy about box?
Oh, you meant like a computer...I was thinking of something else...
Trivial??? It looks a hell of a lot more sophisticated than what Adobe uses to "protect" their Ebooks!
Somebody in marketing already told you what it means. It means "hardened & ruggedized Linux based UNIX kernel".
Damn marketing department...we need a babelfish translator for the marketing drones.
Okay, new game. Who wants to make acronyms for KAZAA that indicate how f*cked they are?
I'm sure that when they shut down again, we can all proclaim them
Killed Again by Zealous Aussie Attorneys
I was thinking about the car stereo idea too. For the $109 plus shipping it costs for this thing, I think I may pick one up and try to hook it into my car somehow. If anyone has any suggestions, post 'em before I destroy my car ;)
of course others thought that. but if you comment negatively on something one of the editors said/did, you can expect to see just how infinite their mod points are. damn bitchslaps. so we all just fall in line to preserve our karma.
Yeah?!!?!
;)
why do us mac users always get shafted on games, and instead only get stuff like photoshop and illustrator that work properly, unlike windows that gets broken graphics apps and all the games? what's with that?
btw, if you want games, get a ps2...much better than a win box