"I know the attitude might be to do it for the sake of doing it, but why ruin a perfectly good mac-mini through overheating with it, with a relatively small gain in performance."
For the sake of doing it. You're new here, aren't you?
And who else besides Apple uses it? Right. If something is essentially only licensed to one huge company, it's under their control (they can use their buying power to sway future versions of the layer).
Um, I don't know where you've been, but Synaptics touchpad drivers (used on just about every notebook I've ever seen) has had this for years.
One finger can be used for pointing or scrolling. Two fingers is used specifically for scrolling quickly (e.g. tap the upper right corner of the pad, then the bottom right to get to the bottom of a page). It pretty much looks like Apple copied Synaptics software (or, in the case they're actually using Synaptics pads, simply had the software ported over).
"In other words, you have failed to fit a PC in Mac Mini"
Yes, but barely. The only reason Apple pulled this off is because they constructed the hardware from top to bottom. All it'll take in the PC world is VIA/ASUS etc. to create a board small enough, with clearance for a PC slimline optical drive. I don't know about you, but I'd MUCH rather have a PC running Linux/MythTV for my home theater than a Mac mini (the only reason I can think of getting one).
Re:And a flood of "What's the point?" ensues
on
Mac mini to PC Hack
·
· Score: 1
"There is no point."
Sure there is. Every geek I've talked to has said "Mac mini looks great, but it'd be even greater if it used standard PC components. The only two things he missed are:
1.) Heat - Putting the laptop drive on top of the heatsink was not a smart idea. 2.) Optical disc - I'm sure if he found a decent slimline he could've rammed it in.
What this article does is shows Dell/HP/et al that there's a clear group of people interested in something like a Mac mini with PC parts. It's up to them to decide to build it. I can't see anything bad because of this.
I own a GC, and I wouldn't say it has a "large number" of A titles. Off hand, I can think of the Metroids, Super Smash Bros and maybe Zelda. Mario was no good this generation, Pikmin 1 and 2 were too short, and Viewtiful Joe is headed to another platform. The reason I keep my GC around is primarily the "collection" series (Mega Man and Sonic, for example), and the wireless controller. My gaming PC, Xbox and PS2 get far more use though
Disclaimer: I own all 3 of the current generation systems and a beefy PC.
"They tend to be unique and wonderfully playable."
Wonderfully playable? Yes. Unique? Hardly. Gamespot gave game of the year for GC to Paper Mario 2. Fun little game, but used the standard RPG format that's been used for years (don't tell me switching to an airplane to complete exactly 5 puzzles during the game is "Unique". It isn't).
Metroid was a fantastic game, but built on a series close to 20 years old. So was Zelda. In fact, the only true "new" series invented with the GameCube are Pikmin and Viewtiful Joe (the second from Capcom). Nintendo is just about the most conservative gaming company there is. Some people like that, but I like the "Jet Set Radios" and "Kalimari Darcies" (sp?) of the world.
Every system has great exclusives. Nintendo's appeals to a family demographic. Xbox appeals to PC fans. PS2 has got the GTAs and Final Fantasies. I wouldn't put one system's exclusives above another.
"Sure Halo's 1&2 are system sellers. But then what?"
Project Gotham Racing, MechAssault. Quirky games like Voodoo Vince, JSRF and Panzer Dragoon. The best versions of multiplatform games for EA. Should I go on?
"Novell had such a bubble near it's end at the top as did Digital and IBM before them. History is just repeating itself."
There's one big difference. In each of those cases, Microsoft was there to burst the bubble and take away the market share. This time around there is no "other Microsoft".
Don't get me wrong, there's going to be competition. OSS continues to make strides in usability (Firefox), and Apple is finally selling a cheap computer. But I think, by best estimates, Apple/OSS could only take away 20% of MS's market share on the OS level.
When Novell collapsed, it was because Microsoft was rising. Same with IBM (fortunately for them, they reshaped their business from software to services). No one is going to grind Microsoft into the dirt anytime soon.
Why would we want these to stop? Seriously. If they were saying "Bittorrent must be completely shut down", I'd be completely against it. But they're only suing people to stop trading pirated movies, which they have every right to do. I would think most of the Slashdot community wouldn't care about that -- if they take away my ability to get a Linux distro, though, that's another story.
You're joking, right? When you use a corporate tool (whether it be a computer, telephone, etc.) you should always assume that your information isn't completely "private", because it isn't. It's the company's. That's what they pay you for.
As an administrator, if I have an employee leave disgruntled, and the boss asks me to find out why, am I to tell him/her "he encrypted his files, therefore he has full privacy". No, he doesn't. It's our machine. If he wants full privacy, he should encrypt files on his own machine.
These are the same people who don't read the words "legal document" on the top of an EULA before clicking through, who click "Yes" when some random page asks to be their homepage, and whose desktop is continually literally with spyware.
"Namely, that they could create obfuscated DTDs and encrypt their data in a proprietary manner while still using it, thus convincing the masses that they're using an open format while not actually using one."
But they won't. They can't. Microsoft has a history of sticking with the original file format they created along with 1.0 of the application. Today's Word docs have a lot "tacked on", but they still have the basic structure openable by the original Word.
WordML (Microsoft's XML structure for Word docs) is fairly clear-cut. They can "obfuscate", but they won't, because people'll will want those original files openable in 10-15 years. Backwards compatibility is a huge goal at MS.
Slashdot Mirror
"My SparcStation 5 worked similarly."
Every PC in the last 10 years or so works similarly.
"I know the attitude might be to do it for the sake of doing it, but why ruin a perfectly good mac-mini through overheating with it, with a relatively small gain in performance."
For the sake of doing it. You're new here, aren't you?
And who else besides Apple uses it? Right. If something is essentially only licensed to one huge company, it's under their control (they can use their buying power to sway future versions of the layer).
"it totally ignores their pointless, me-too, proprietary .wma crapmat"
Unlike, say, Apple's pointless, me-too, proprietary FairPlay crapmat?
With commentary by The Sarcastic Sidekick.
"This is like, what, the 5th story in a row dealing with Microsoft and/or Windows. The f$cking borg have landed. Prepare to be assimulated."
Stories about a software company on a "News for Nerds" site? A travesty! Seriously, though, calm down. Where's your Ritalin?
Um, I don't know where you've been, but Synaptics touchpad drivers (used on just about every notebook I've ever seen) has had this for years.
One finger can be used for pointing or scrolling. Two fingers is used specifically for scrolling quickly (e.g. tap the upper right corner of the pad, then the bottom right to get to the bottom of a page). It pretty much looks like Apple copied Synaptics software (or, in the case they're actually using Synaptics pads, simply had the software ported over).
"Apple explained it was the right size, and that's good enough for me."
"The childlike voices in my head told me to kill people. That's good enough for me!"
Exactly. I like OSS. Mac OS X basically mocks OSS (open the kernel and underlying BSD (which was open anyway) and leave everything else closed. Pfft.
"In other words, you have failed to fit a PC in Mac Mini"
Yes, but barely. The only reason Apple pulled this off is because they constructed the hardware from top to bottom. All it'll take in the PC world is VIA/ASUS etc. to create a board small enough, with clearance for a PC slimline optical drive. I don't know about you, but I'd MUCH rather have a PC running Linux/MythTV for my home theater than a Mac mini (the only reason I can think of getting one).
"There is no point."
Sure there is. Every geek I've talked to has said "Mac mini looks great, but it'd be even greater if it used standard PC components. The only two things he missed are:
1.) Heat - Putting the laptop drive on top of the heatsink was not a smart idea.
2.) Optical disc - I'm sure if he found a decent slimline he could've rammed it in.
What this article does is shows Dell/HP/et al that there's a clear group of people interested in something like a Mac mini with PC parts. It's up to them to decide to build it. I can't see anything bad because of this.
Looks like MS will need to come up with a new name for the Xbox 3.
I own a GC, and I wouldn't say it has a "large number" of A titles. Off hand, I can think of the Metroids, Super Smash Bros and maybe Zelda. Mario was no good this generation, Pikmin 1 and 2 were too short, and Viewtiful Joe is headed to another platform. The reason I keep my GC around is primarily the "collection" series (Mega Man and Sonic, for example), and the wireless controller. My gaming PC, Xbox and PS2 get far more use though
Actually, look up Tomb Raider and Jumping Flash sometime. There was certainly a 3D platforming world before Mario 64.
Disclaimer: I own all 3 of the current generation systems and a beefy PC.
"They tend to be unique and wonderfully playable."
Wonderfully playable? Yes. Unique? Hardly. Gamespot gave game of the year for GC to Paper Mario 2. Fun little game, but used the standard RPG format that's been used for years (don't tell me switching to an airplane to complete exactly 5 puzzles during the game is "Unique". It isn't).
Metroid was a fantastic game, but built on a series close to 20 years old. So was Zelda. In fact, the only true "new" series invented with the GameCube are Pikmin and Viewtiful Joe (the second from Capcom). Nintendo is just about the most conservative gaming company there is. Some people like that, but I like the "Jet Set Radios" and "Kalimari Darcies" (sp?) of the world.
Every system has great exclusives. Nintendo's appeals to a family demographic. Xbox appeals to PC fans. PS2 has got the GTAs and Final Fantasies. I wouldn't put one system's exclusives above another.
"Sure Halo's 1&2 are system sellers. But then what?"
Project Gotham Racing, MechAssault. Quirky games like Voodoo Vince, JSRF and Panzer Dragoon. The best versions of multiplatform games for EA. Should I go on?
"Novell had such a bubble near it's end at the top as did Digital and IBM before them. History is just repeating itself."
There's one big difference. In each of those cases, Microsoft was there to burst the bubble and take away the market share. This time around there is no "other Microsoft".
Don't get me wrong, there's going to be competition. OSS continues to make strides in usability (Firefox), and Apple is finally selling a cheap computer. But I think, by best estimates, Apple/OSS could only take away 20% of MS's market share on the OS level.
When Novell collapsed, it was because Microsoft was rising. Same with IBM (fortunately for them, they reshaped their business from software to services). No one is going to grind Microsoft into the dirt anytime soon.
"It requires an Active Directory domain"
Actually, no. You can encrypt/recover keys as a local administrator. I've done so on my home machines.
Why would we want these to stop? Seriously. If they were saying "Bittorrent must be completely shut down", I'd be completely against it. But they're only suing people to stop trading pirated movies, which they have every right to do. I would think most of the Slashdot community wouldn't care about that -- if they take away my ability to get a Linux distro, though, that's another story.
"which would be both cooler and clock-for-clock more powerful than a G5"
And more expensive. And would eat more precious space in the chassis.
You're joking, right? When you use a corporate tool (whether it be a computer, telephone, etc.) you should always assume that your information isn't completely "private", because it isn't. It's the company's. That's what they pay you for.
As an administrator, if I have an employee leave disgruntled, and the boss asks me to find out why, am I to tell him/her "he encrypted his files, therefore he has full privacy". No, he doesn't. It's our machine. If he wants full privacy, he should encrypt files on his own machine.
Where's the screen? Keyboard? Mouse? Add these on and you're around $1000 easily.
"How could anyone be confused?"
These are the same people who don't read the words "legal document" on the top of an EULA before clicking through, who click "Yes" when some random page asks to be their homepage, and whose desktop is continually literally with spyware.
"Namely, that they could create obfuscated DTDs and encrypt their data in a proprietary manner while still using it, thus convincing the masses that they're using an open format while not actually using one."
But they won't. They can't. Microsoft has a history of sticking with the original file format they created along with 1.0 of the application. Today's Word docs have a lot "tacked on", but they still have the basic structure openable by the original Word.
WordML (Microsoft's XML structure for Word docs) is fairly clear-cut. They can "obfuscate", but they won't, because people'll will want those original files openable in 10-15 years. Backwards compatibility is a huge goal at MS.
*Click click click click!*
If the Sharks don't know better... Maria!
*Click click click click!*