For Windows 2000 Server, go to Add/Remove programs, select Terminal Services, pick remote administration, reboot. If you need to remote into a W2K Pro machine, you'd have to resort to something like VNC. I've never thought of remoting into other workstations being a big need for software development. Isn't that what VMs are for?;) It was big for our IT support helpdesks though, I forgot that W2K workstations didn't have it built in. Now that I think of it, I remember using SMS for remote access for a lot of NT/2000 stuff... *shudder*
So it's just a replacement for walking over to the next cubicle to BS?
Is the history of your IM discussions archived? Can you forward them? Broadcast to multiple people? BCC? Unless you have a very sophisticated IM system, it's really no replacement for email, but a supplement. The last IM system I knew of that was even close to being a good email replacement was ICQ, but it lacked the interface you'd need for professional use.
I'm curious, do you actually have _important_, work related discussions over IM? Sounds like a fun place to work anyway!
The unresponsive Gui (see zend framework) often makes people think that Java is slow. Unresponsive is slow. I understand your argument that GUI unresponsiveness makes an application "slow", but he means that bad GUI programming leads people to think the entire language/platform is slow by nature, which is untrue.
Lack of progress bars in an application doesn't make Java slow, for example.
WTF, they're not reselling basic phone service. They're providing value added VOIP over the internet service customers might receive from a company that also provides regular phone service.
If I lease a car to someone, and they use it for a taxi service, how exactly is that unfair? If McDonald's sells burgers and provides public outdoor seating (hypothetical, they really don't AFAIK), and someone opens up a hotdog stand across the street, what wrong is being done?
The phone line required for DSL service doesn't even compare to Vonage's service. Will AT&T email you and anyone else in your household a copy of all your voicemails? Virtual numbers? Pick your own area code? Portable service? Transfer to another number when the service is unavailable? Softphone? How much do phone companies charge for anything close to those features, if they are available at all? How many offer additional lines for $5? I'm curious, do phone companies get all pissy because dial-up ISPs are getting "free rides"?
Vonage is a HUGE added value over basic phone service, and the fact that it can run over a traditional phone company's INTERNET service is completely irrelevant. I can "sling" TV over my cable provider's internet service too. It's not sleazy reselling like you suggest. There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with it. If phone/cable companies don't want to enable competition via the internet, they need to stop providing internet service. You can't have your cake and eat it too (without lots of sleazy lobbying).
Support Vonage, because when they go, we'll slip into a VOIP dark age. Look how "innovative" your phone and cable service providers have been over the last decade, that's what you'll have to look forward too.
They don't have nearly as many features as Vonage, and cost more for basic service. I'm going to see red if I have to get VOIP from my cable company or a regular phone line.
Why exactly is anyone defending this guy? Security research is a good thing, but you don't go to other people's houses testing their locks, then telling the whole neighborhood where you were successfully able to break in. This was extremely unprofessional, so why should he get paid for this "work"?
The government, and you if it were your house, SHOULD be paranoid. We have no idea what this man actually did with the information he found. I say it warrants an investigation, plain and simple.
Time Machine doesn't work on my old-fashioned partitioned external hard disk (half is an NTFS partition for Windows backups...) I'm curious what the OTHER half is. I had a hell of a time getting a drive partitioned so that Windows could see its part. Does Time Machine require a GUID format disk?
Where did ANYONE say Iraqi deaths are "inferior" to American deaths? Wait a damned second, when the hell was Iraqi even a race? Racism is not that hard to understand! If I thought race X was inferior or superior in any way to races Y, Z or W, than I might be a racist.
During a time of crisis, the lives of enemy combatants devalue ever so slightly. Are you following me? Race has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Why did racism even come up here? Oh right, some asshole a few posts up accused everyone of being racist because he found a frightening guestimate of civilian casualties and we're not all sending them sympathy cards or something. Well, what are you waiting for? Let's keep the flamewar going and call everyone a racist for not dredging the loss estimates for all the other countries (since we're putting actual races aside now) involved in the conflict. I want to see the cards flowing people! Flowers and little chocolate hearts too! Lets show the Iraqis, err, everyone maimed, injured, or killed evarrr, that we care so we can get this big 'R' off our chest.
OK, seriously now, move on. Racism shouldn't have ever been brought up. If anything, "A beautiful mind (821714)" owes an apology for dropping the 'R' bomb WAY the fuck off target.
So more than 650 THOUSAND (in the first three years of occupation) iraqi civilian deaths are not filling them? You know what? Your source doesn't say that at all. No doubt many people died in combat, but stating garbage like 650,000 civilians died as fact is more than a little troubling.
From your "Lancet source":
"We estimate that between March 18, 2003, and June, 2006, an additional 654965 (392979-942636) Iraqis have died above what would have been expected on the basis of the pre-invasion crude mortality rate as a consequence of the coalition invasion. Of these deaths, we estimate that 601027 (426369-793663) were due to violence." "Separation of combatant from non-combatant deaths during interviews was not attempted, since such information would probably be concealed by household informants, and to ask about this could put interviewers at risk.
Their sample size was 12,000, in which a total of 629 deaths were reported.
You (in a general sense), are racist when you talk about the death of a few thousand american soldiers, but neglect to mention or even less, acknowledge the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians.) I would buy "insensitive". That is NOT racist "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."
According to the surveys Saddam's Iraq was safety paradise to live in Is that surprising, considering there is war going on? Let's not be mistaken, "safety paradise" != "paradise". Hell, Gitmo is a "safety paradise" compared to pre-invasion Iraq.
Whether the document is real and true or not does not matter. It does bring to the public light that there is more than a slight possibility that the US government has, and is using tactics and methods it publicly denounces as horrendous. I'm almost willing to bet that the reality (assuming this is actually the real document) is going to let down a lot of people - Some folks of a certain ideological bent prolly read the summary and went "a-ha! now we can uncover all those BUSH crimes!"
Publishing this document is what we are supposed to be fighting for... Freedoms, remember those things that the arabs hate us for? No matter what the ideological slant you may take, I strongly suspect that the truth is going to be a lot more mundane - again, assuming this thing is not a fabrication in either one direction or the other.
Ostensibly, the US government was trying to give such freedoms and democracy to Iraqis. If in fact the US has been abusive in doing so, even on a small scale, it brings into question ALL that the Bush administration has done, and I do mean ALL of it, and every person he has appointed etc. I'm almost willing to bet that the reality (assuming this is actually the real document) is going to let down a lot of people - Some folks of a certain ideological bent prolly read the summary and went "a-ha! now we can uncover all those BUSH crimes!" No matter what the ideological slant you may take, I strongly suspect that the truth is going to be a lot more mundane - again, assuming this thing is not a fabrication in either one direction or the other.
The simple fact that this exists highlights the general disdain for the Bush administration, and what has been done on his watch, and/or under his order. You inferred all that from a SOP document being released. Maybe it was done to make people like you shut up already. A leaked SOP titled "How to Cook Forty Arabs" would be embarrassing, this is not.
If all was rosy and righteous, this would be seen as a easily recognizable joke. The fact that it is not should be telling you something, perhaps you should be listening to that nagging voice in the back of your mind. What are you talking about? I've spent time in the military, it DOES look like a real SOP. That tells me... someone leaked a FOUO document. You're trying to make so much more of this, it's plain silly man.
If all was rosy and righteous, the WTC would still be standing, and we'd all get 72 virgins (if so desired) in the afterlife, WITHOUT blowing shit up.
For example, this phone can open and edit (but not create) Microsoft Office documents. Wrong! That's not an advantage, that's insane. At least, I can't remember the last time I was looking at my cellphone thinking, "Damn, I wish right now I could open up a Word document!", not even if one was attached to an e-mail. I sort of agree with you. Editing office docs on a phone is just bad for your blood pressure. Opening them on the other hand is sometimes a necessary evil. If you have a company issued smartphone, the reasoning is that you'll be able to more promptly answer emails. Quite often, I've gotten "Take a look at this, tell me what you think. (X.doc, Y.xls attached) emails, and every now and then it's time sensitive and I'm not at a PC. I'm not sure I can picture a scenario where I'd need to edit (but not create!?) an office file on my phone. It's just an unreasonable expectation for someone outside the office to unexpectedly receive, edit and return an office document. View it, write back an email saying "Correct X, Y, and Z."
I could see mobile spreadsheets being useful somewhat. I mean "mobile spreadsheet" too, not a PC spreadsheet crammed into a phone. Taking a document designed for printing and/or viewing on a PC and squeezing it into a 2-3" phone with a micro sized input device breaks the whole WYSIWYG philosophy that modern office software is based upon.
There is no need for palm sized word processing, unless your country's standard business letter is about half the size of a US postcard. Spreadsheets are versatile enough to be useful, but not being able to create them (you're forced to view PC designed spreadsheets??) doesn't really give you mobile-spreadsheet capabilities.
Yaaargh, Microsoft's mobile "PC" platform is so backwards. Taking concepts that don't even make sense on desktops anymore and ruining phones with them too.
This relatively new license category is the real reason this plane might succeed. The summary is VERY misleading. The plane, from TFS is in the light sport category, NOT ultralight. This means you need a license, a sport pilot license. It basically has about half the requirements of a private pilot license, but I believe you don't need a medical if you have a valid US driver's license.
Here, educate yourselves...
And a sky filled with people who don't have pilot's licenses could be problematic. I usually pick on Slashdot for this, but it really is The New York Times' fault. The author is a moron.
I have no f'ing intention to rip 50 or even 30GB discs. Gutting all the extra features, and compressing the video just SORT OF defeats the purpose of buying an HD-DVD or Blu-ray to begin with. Really man, stick with DVD's. They're already compressed better for you. Do you really find it necessary to build TB or greater file servers in your own home to play movies you may or may not even own? My CD binder does a better job, takes less space, and no power.
Reason #4:
It's not Microsoft.
You must have been born yesterday if you think Sony is the greater of two evils.
And yes, version control has been doing something similar for a long time. Uhhh... what, backups? Congratulations... yes, backup software and versioning systems share at least one common goal, point in time recovery.
Filesystem features like links, snapshots, folders, and more complex things like databases have all been used to implement backup solutions. Using filesystem features alone to track versioning info is not new, and _very_ limiting. Snapshots can be beneficial to a backup solution for things like block level incrementals. But, can you migrate parts of a snapshot set to different volumes? Let's say, move the older full snapshot to tape, and keep the incremental snapshots on SAN disk? Can you recover individual files from a snapshot without the full being present, assuming the full _could_ have been moved/deleted? Versioning systems can happily use filesystem features because they don't need to use multiple volumes.
I do hope that filesystem features catch up to the needs of modern backup systems, but even with ZFS, this doesn't seem to be the case. Not entirely anyway. Microsoft's VSS isn't there either (correct me if I'm wrong, but there's no way to pull a single file out of an incremental VSS snapshot on a remote volume without importing the whole thing into the filesystem right?). Backup software alone can still do more.
For the hundredth time, Time Machine is automated, very easy to setup, and very easy to use. It isn't doing, or claiming to be doing anything new or special in terms of backup method. Apple still did a great job.
The ease of use and he's referring to is that the incremental backups that are stored all appear like full backups from a file system perspective. Whoa there, that's something nearly every backup/restore client does. That's sort of the whole point of an incremental backup. Basically, full(past) + incr(date) = full(date) Therefore, most restore clients show you full(date) when your browsing your backups. That's nothing special.
The ease of use is clearly in Time Machine's setup, which has been referred to as "two step backup."
You could say that about ANY sequel launched on a new platform. If you want the game that bad, get the new system. Has this changed at all in the history of video game franchises?
Besides, you're better off whining about Wii sequels. I can stand right in front of dozens of titles I want, cool accessories, etc, and have no hope of buying a Wii. This hasn't changed for about a year now. That being said, I'm not shedding any tears because the sequels to my favorite games weren't released for the Game Cube instead. Only a fool would (OK, maybe children too).
Enough with this "graphics" don't matter crap. It very much matters. Good graphics wont make a bad game good, much like good special effects wont turn a bad movie into a good one (OK, mediocre for both is possible). Better graphics make a good game great, and an old game new again.
Stop using that line as defense for Wii or DS graphics capability. They already have great games, and don't need lame excuses. In layman's terms: existing, good Wii or DS game + better graphics = more betterer game. You're making excuses for something you know damned well will change for the better the second an HD Nintendo box, or a next-gen Gameboy arrives.... and they WILL.
Some elite Doom players began using the mouse but they were a small minority. "Elite" Doom 95 players? I don't know about elite, being such late comers and all. I mean, most people were still using DOS back when Doom came out. I clearly remember "elite" Doom I/II and Descent players used keyboards. Using a mouse for gaming probably became chic a bit after Windows 95 came out at least.
I can't imagine using a mouse in Doom I/II being all that beneficial, they were designed for keyboard use primarily, both being DOS games and all. This is true of the original Quake also. Circle strafing a 2d sprite is... awkward, and you couldn't exactly sneak up behind something in Doom. You didn't have any long range instant firing weapons like a rifle, and lining up long range shots with the precision of a mouse was useless, everything moved too fast. If you think using a keyboard for Quake is weird, consider that you had to MANUALLY install TCP/IP drivers for Windows 95 to play Quake over IP networks, and then it did NO client side prediction. Quake lasted for many many years, and a lot of stuff changed over time.
It wasn't until the true 3D Quake, which required vertical aiming Quake came out sometime after Windows 95, but even then it didn't require a mouse, and mouselook had to be turned on manually. Quake was a DOS game. It did have autoaim on by default, like other quasi-3d games before it, vertical aiming done for you. Quake was very playable with just a keyboard. QuakeWorld is a whole different subject, as is Doom 95.
Even after common mouse use, no version of Quake ever shipped with WASD bindings, IIRC. I don't know if any game shipped earlier with those defaults, but I and many others learned from other Quake players and did the bindings ourselves. WASD does make sense, but I think it only got popular after QuakeWorld and playing on the internet was common.
The iPhone was on Slashdot daily, it was going to spawn undead and be the new hot drug on the street, instead it just faded into the mists and rarely gets mentioned any more, the hype is no longer needed and the content of the product just isn't enough to stand on it's own two feet. Emphasis my own.
You're gauging this solely based on Slashdot article submissions? I think you may have slipped up and meant Manhunt in there at the end, but... Using that guideline, can you tell me which US presidential candidates are hot now, other than "BUSH SUCKS"?
Slashdot presents an awfully warped view of the world if it's the only place you get your news err.. opinions from.
Um, first, there's a LOT more to EMC than low end iSCSI storage. In fact, iSCSI is probably the absolute last thing that should pop into mind when you hear EMC.
something Dell's been trying to do for a while anyway What? Losing a channel partnership isn't something you have to TRY to do. Dell could negotiate cutthroat prices with almost any storage vendor. So if they wanted to, why didn't they?
Also, what makes you so sure Dell is would stop selling fibre channel? Or what makes you think Dell would stop reselling EMC fibre channel devices? iSCSI is so... wrong for a SAN. The logic is it _can_ be cheaper because you can reuse existing network equipment. *cough* And skip the iSCSI HBAs. *ahem* and single path. Yaaaayyy, now it's just block-level NAS.
My guess is Dell made this decision to compete with HP for price sensitive customers looking at server/storage bundles.
I think you're right. I remember performing this operation on Windows 95 my first time, and I completely expected it to overwrite the old folder, so I made a copy just in case. I think some people just got used to how other file managers do it, and forgot what their initial expectations were. OS X more consistently models the idea of moving an object to a location where a same named object exists.
I've probably done a lot more delete+move procedures than I've needed to do merges now that I think of it. I do this with every JDeveloper upgrade anyway. Still, it would be very handy to have a "merge" option in finder.
That's because PCs haven't added any new basic capabilities worth using in games. A high-end machine is just faster, more memory, etc. Where did all the PC gamepads and joysticks go? How is rumble support on PCs going? Surround sound anyone? How many titles support these? Consider things the PC has had for years before consoles, where are the PC (excluding Mac) games that use a webcam? Eye of judgement could have been done probably a decade ago for PCs. You had webcams, the internet connectivity was prevalent, bam, print some game pieces on your ink jet and play live battle chess... I wish. To be fair, the camera is just an accessory for the PS too, but my point is, only the most basic features of a PC system are used, regardless of what's available, and the same goes for consoles. Consoles have more base features, because they are specialized computers. Start targeting a generic console platform, and all you end up with is a mediocre upgrade to the PC game platform. Thanks Microsoft!
The biggest innovation in years for PC gaming was Arrow Keys -> WASD. Ok, joking, there have been things like LAN/Internet gaming, teamspeak (or was the SOCOM headset first?), script-ability, mods, customization, etc. The thing is, as console->PC ports get more common, the PC loses it edge and things like mods/scripting/customization go out the window. What I'm saying is that the PC being so diverse is a bad thing for gaming, hence game consoles, and you'd better hope new games continue using it's unique aspects. But, I bet a lot of you just can't WAIT until games start use^H^H^Hdepending on Live for Windows. *gagwithspoon*
It all boils down to Apple having a limited set of hardware to make this work on I hear this quite a bit, and I used to believe it a while back also, as an 'excuse' for Apple's integration. Lets put aside custom built PCs for a minute, and very few laptops are custom made anyway... Do major PC manufacturers NOT have the ability to properly integrate their hardware with Windows? Is there some driver framework that Microsoft is lacking?
Apple's hardware lineup isn't any more limited than any other single PC manufacturer... They support Intel & PowerPC architectures, a variety of vendors for graphics, networking, IO, etc. They have low end notebooks, high end notebooks, mini systems, workstations, rack mounted servers, and desktop systems. What exactly is it within Apple that achieves the great SW/HW integration that HP/IBM/DELL/Tohiba, etc. and Microsoft cannot? Too little standardization, lack of OS frameworks, politics, hard work, what?
Blame it on the HW manufacturer, or Microsoft, or both, but there's no good reason they can't achieve the great integration Apple has. Apple really does put a lot of work into it.
Slashdot Mirror
For Windows 2000 Server, go to Add/Remove programs, select Terminal Services, pick remote administration, reboot. If you need to remote into a W2K Pro machine, you'd have to resort to something like VNC. I've never thought of remoting into other workstations being a big need for software development. Isn't that what VMs are for? ;) It was big for our IT support helpdesks though, I forgot that W2K workstations didn't have it built in. Now that I think of it, I remember using SMS for remote access for a lot of NT/2000 stuff... *shudder*
So it's just a replacement for walking over to the next cubicle to BS?
Is the history of your IM discussions archived? Can you forward them? Broadcast to multiple people? BCC?
Unless you have a very sophisticated IM system, it's really no replacement for email, but a supplement. The last IM system I knew of that was even close to being a good email replacement was ICQ, but it lacked the interface you'd need for professional use.
I'm curious, do you actually have _important_, work related discussions over IM? Sounds like a fun place to work anyway!
Lack of progress bars in an application doesn't make Java slow, for example.
WTF, they're not reselling basic phone service. They're providing value added VOIP over the internet service customers might receive from a company that also provides regular phone service.
If I lease a car to someone, and they use it for a taxi service, how exactly is that unfair?
If McDonald's sells burgers and provides public outdoor seating (hypothetical, they really don't AFAIK), and someone opens up a hotdog stand across the street, what wrong is being done?
The phone line required for DSL service doesn't even compare to Vonage's service. Will AT&T email you and anyone else in your household a copy of all your voicemails? Virtual numbers? Pick your own area code? Portable service? Transfer to another number when the service is unavailable? Softphone? How much do phone companies charge for anything close to those features, if they are available at all? How many offer additional lines for $5? I'm curious, do phone companies get all pissy because dial-up ISPs are getting "free rides"?
Vonage is a HUGE added value over basic phone service, and the fact that it can run over a traditional phone company's INTERNET service is completely irrelevant.
I can "sling" TV over my cable provider's internet service too. It's not sleazy reselling like you suggest. There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with it. If phone/cable companies don't want to enable competition via the internet, they need to stop providing internet service. You can't have your cake and eat it too (without lots of sleazy lobbying).
Support Vonage, because when they go, we'll slip into a VOIP dark age. Look how "innovative" your phone and cable service providers have been over the last decade, that's what you'll have to look forward too.
They don't have nearly as many features as Vonage, and cost more for basic service. I'm going to see red if I have to get VOIP from my cable company or a regular phone line.
Why exactly is anyone defending this guy? Security research is a good thing, but you don't go to other people's houses testing their locks, then telling the whole neighborhood where you were successfully able to break in. This was extremely unprofessional, so why should he get paid for this "work"?
The government, and you if it were your house, SHOULD be paranoid.
We have no idea what this man actually did with the information he found. I say it warrants an investigation, plain and simple.
Where did ANYONE say Iraqi deaths are "inferior" to American deaths? Wait a damned second, when the hell was Iraqi even a race?
Racism is not that hard to understand! If I thought race X was inferior or superior in any way to races Y, Z or W, than I might be a racist.
During a time of crisis, the lives of enemy combatants devalue ever so slightly. Are you following me? Race has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Why did racism even come up here? Oh right, some asshole a few posts up accused everyone of being racist because he found a frightening guestimate of civilian casualties and we're not all sending them sympathy cards or something. Well, what are you waiting for? Let's keep the flamewar going and call everyone a racist for not dredging the loss estimates for all the other countries (since we're putting actual races aside now) involved in the conflict. I want to see the cards flowing people! Flowers and little chocolate hearts too! Lets show the Iraqis, err, everyone maimed, injured, or killed evarrr, that we care so we can get this big 'R' off our chest.
OK, seriously now, move on. Racism shouldn't have ever been brought up. If anything, "A beautiful mind (821714)" owes an apology for dropping the 'R' bomb WAY the fuck off target.
From your "Lancet source":
"We estimate that between March 18, 2003, and June, 2006, an additional 654965 (392979-942636) Iraqis have died above what would have been expected on the basis of the pre-invasion crude mortality rate as a consequence of the coalition invasion. Of these deaths, we estimate that 601027 (426369-793663) were due to violence."
"Separation of combatant from non-combatant deaths during interviews was not attempted, since such information would probably be concealed by household informants, and to ask about this could put interviewers at risk.
Their sample size was 12,000, in which a total of 629 deaths were reported. You (in a general sense), are racist when you talk about the death of a few thousand american soldiers, but neglect to mention or even less, acknowledge the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians.) I would buy "insensitive". That is NOT racist "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to the surveys Saddam's Iraq was safety paradise to live in Is that surprising, considering there is war going on? Let's not be mistaken, "safety paradise" != "paradise". Hell, Gitmo is a "safety paradise" compared to pre-invasion Iraq.
A leaked SOP titled "How to Cook Forty Arabs" would be embarrassing, this is not. If all was rosy and righteous, this would be seen as a easily recognizable joke. The fact that it is not should be telling you something, perhaps you should be listening to that nagging voice in the back of your mind. What are you talking about? I've spent time in the military, it DOES look like a real SOP. That tells me... someone leaked a FOUO document. You're trying to make so much more of this, it's plain silly man.
If all was rosy and righteous, the WTC would still be standing, and we'd all get 72 virgins (if so desired) in the afterlife, WITHOUT blowing shit up.
They already did that. They seemed to have moved it though.
I could see mobile spreadsheets being useful somewhat. I mean "mobile spreadsheet" too, not a PC spreadsheet crammed into a phone. Taking a document designed for printing and/or viewing on a PC and squeezing it into a 2-3" phone with a micro sized input device breaks the whole WYSIWYG philosophy that modern office software is based upon.
There is no need for palm sized word processing, unless your country's standard business letter is about half the size of a US postcard. Spreadsheets are versatile enough to be useful, but not being able to create them (you're forced to view PC designed spreadsheets??) doesn't really give you mobile-spreadsheet capabilities.
Yaaargh, Microsoft's mobile "PC" platform is so backwards. Taking concepts that don't even make sense on desktops anymore and ruining phones with them too.
Here, educate yourselves... And a sky filled with people who don't have pilot's licenses could be problematic. I usually pick on Slashdot for this, but it really is The New York Times' fault. The author is a moron.
Sport pilot.
I picked Blu-ray.
Reason #1:
It's not MICROSOFT
Reason #2:
It's standard with my PS3.
Reason #3:
I have no f'ing intention to rip 50 or even 30GB discs. Gutting all the extra features, and compressing the video just SORT OF defeats the purpose of buying an HD-DVD or Blu-ray to begin with. Really man, stick with DVD's. They're already compressed better for you. Do you really find it necessary to build TB or greater file servers in your own home to play movies you may or may not even own? My CD binder does a better job, takes less space, and no power.
Reason #4:
It's not Microsoft.
You must have been born yesterday if you think Sony is the greater of two evils.
Filesystem features like links, snapshots, folders, and more complex things like databases have all been used to implement backup solutions. Using filesystem features alone to track versioning info is not new, and _very_ limiting. Snapshots can be beneficial to a backup solution for things like block level incrementals. But, can you migrate parts of a snapshot set to different volumes? Let's say, move the older full snapshot to tape, and keep the incremental snapshots on SAN disk? Can you recover individual files from a snapshot without the full being present, assuming the full _could_ have been moved/deleted? Versioning systems can happily use filesystem features because they don't need to use multiple volumes.
I do hope that filesystem features catch up to the needs of modern backup systems, but even with ZFS, this doesn't seem to be the case. Not entirely anyway. Microsoft's VSS isn't there either (correct me if I'm wrong, but there's no way to pull a single file out of an incremental VSS snapshot on a remote volume without importing the whole thing into the filesystem right?). Backup software alone can still do more.
For the hundredth time, Time Machine is automated, very easy to setup, and very easy to use. It isn't doing, or claiming to be doing anything new or special in terms of backup method. Apple still did a great job.
Basically, full(past) + incr(date) = full(date)
Therefore, most restore clients show you full(date) when your browsing your backups. That's nothing special.
The ease of use is clearly in Time Machine's setup, which has been referred to as "two step backup."
You could say that about ANY sequel launched on a new platform. If you want the game that bad, get the new system. Has this changed at all in the history of video game franchises?
Besides, you're better off whining about Wii sequels. I can stand right in front of dozens of titles I want, cool accessories, etc, and have no hope of buying a Wii. This hasn't changed for about a year now. That being said, I'm not shedding any tears because the sequels to my favorite games weren't released for the Game Cube instead. Only a fool would (OK, maybe children too).
Enough with this "graphics" don't matter crap. It very much matters. Good graphics wont make a bad game good, much like good special effects wont turn a bad movie into a good one (OK, mediocre for both is possible). Better graphics make a good game great, and an old game new again.
... and they WILL.
Stop using that line as defense for Wii or DS graphics capability. They already have great games, and don't need lame excuses. In layman's terms: existing, good Wii or DS game + better graphics = more betterer game.
You're making excuses for something you know damned well will change for the better the second an HD Nintendo box, or a next-gen Gameboy arrives.
I can't imagine using a mouse in Doom I/II being all that beneficial, they were designed for keyboard use primarily, both being DOS games and all. This is true of the original Quake also. Circle strafing a 2d sprite is... awkward, and you couldn't exactly sneak up behind something in Doom. You didn't have any long range instant firing weapons like a rifle, and lining up long range shots with the precision of a mouse was useless, everything moved too fast. If you think using a keyboard for Quake is weird, consider that you had to MANUALLY install TCP/IP drivers for Windows 95 to play Quake over IP networks, and then it did NO client side prediction. Quake lasted for many many years, and a lot of stuff changed over time. It wasn't until the true 3D Quake, which required vertical aiming Quake came out sometime after Windows 95, but even then it didn't require a mouse, and mouselook had to be turned on manually. Quake was a DOS game. It did have autoaim on by default, like other quasi-3d games before it, vertical aiming done for you. Quake was very playable with just a keyboard. QuakeWorld is a whole different subject, as is Doom 95.
Even after common mouse use, no version of Quake ever shipped with WASD bindings, IIRC. I don't know if any game shipped earlier with those defaults, but I and many others learned from other Quake players and did the bindings ourselves. WASD does make sense, but I think it only got popular after QuakeWorld and playing on the internet was common.
You're gauging this solely based on Slashdot article submissions? I think you may have slipped up and meant Manhunt in there at the end, but...
Using that guideline, can you tell me which US presidential candidates are hot now, other than "BUSH SUCKS"?
Slashdot presents an awfully warped view of the world if it's the only place you get your news err.. opinions from.
Also, what makes you so sure Dell is would stop selling fibre channel? Or what makes you think Dell would stop reselling EMC fibre channel devices?
iSCSI is so... wrong for a SAN. The logic is it _can_ be cheaper because you can reuse existing network equipment. *cough* And skip the iSCSI HBAs. *ahem* and single path. Yaaaayyy, now it's just block-level NAS.
My guess is Dell made this decision to compete with HP for price sensitive customers looking at server/storage bundles.
I think you're right. I remember performing this operation on Windows 95 my first time, and I completely expected it to overwrite the old folder, so I made a copy just in case. I think some people just got used to how other file managers do it, and forgot what their initial expectations were. OS X more consistently models the idea of moving an object to a location where a same named object exists.
I've probably done a lot more delete+move procedures than I've needed to do merges now that I think of it. I do this with every JDeveloper upgrade anyway. Still, it would be very handy to have a "merge" option in finder.
That's because PCs haven't added any new basic capabilities worth using in games. A high-end machine is just faster, more memory, etc. Where did all the PC gamepads and joysticks go? How is rumble support on PCs going? Surround sound anyone? How many titles support these? Consider things the PC has had for years before consoles, where are the PC (excluding Mac) games that use a webcam? Eye of judgement could have been done probably a decade ago for PCs. You had webcams, the internet connectivity was prevalent, bam, print some game pieces on your ink jet and play live battle chess... I wish. To be fair, the camera is just an accessory for the PS too, but my point is, only the most basic features of a PC system are used, regardless of what's available, and the same goes for consoles. Consoles have more base features, because they are specialized computers. Start targeting a generic console platform, and all you end up with is a mediocre upgrade to the PC game platform. Thanks Microsoft!
The biggest innovation in years for PC gaming was Arrow Keys -> WASD. Ok, joking, there have been things like LAN/Internet gaming, teamspeak (or was the SOCOM headset first?), script-ability, mods, customization, etc.
The thing is, as console->PC ports get more common, the PC loses it edge and things like mods/scripting/customization go out the window. What I'm saying is that the PC being so diverse is a bad thing for gaming, hence game consoles, and you'd better hope new games continue using it's unique aspects. But, I bet a lot of you just can't WAIT until games start use^H^H^Hdepending on Live for Windows. *gagwithspoon*
Apple's hardware lineup isn't any more limited than any other single PC manufacturer... They support Intel & PowerPC architectures, a variety of vendors for graphics, networking, IO, etc. They have low end notebooks, high end notebooks, mini systems, workstations, rack mounted servers, and desktop systems. What exactly is it within Apple that achieves the great SW/HW integration that HP/IBM/DELL/Tohiba, etc. and Microsoft cannot? Too little standardization, lack of OS frameworks, politics, hard work, what?
Blame it on the HW manufacturer, or Microsoft, or both, but there's no good reason they can't achieve the great integration Apple has. Apple really does put a lot of work into it.