As many others here have said, why would you want that in a laptop? Just curious... apparently you're the only one commenting here who's a potential purchaser of said Sony Vaio.
I think you are confusing SMP with something else.
A dual G4, or a dual anything, by it's very nature is SMP. SMP stands for symmetric multi-processing. Having more than one processor in a desktop machine generally means SMP.
And just for the record, both of those G4's have AltiVec as well. That's (afaik) an instruction set.
The reason it "doesn't go full screen" is the same reason it "loves to put up nag screens to upgrade to pro". They want you to buy it, plain and simple.
QuickTime does not do full screen unless it is the pro version.
Since you mention that you have the pro version as well, I don't know why you are complaining about the lack of full screen and the nag screens.
The only complaints you have left are "it has a terrible UI" and "likes to screw with file associations and browser settings".
Now find me a media player for Windows that doesn't fit those qualifications. Do not reply to this and tell me Windows Media Player doesn't.
I don't think QuickTime is great. It may even be sub-par. But that's compared to other media players that I can only describe as "suffering from multiple terminal infectious diseases" (RealOne Player) or "as ugly as Louie Anderson from the waist down" (Windows Media Player).
Ironic, considering Sony owns a huge record label (Sony Music) and is a member of the RIAA.
In fact, all of these Sony labels are members of the RIAA, according to their Members List:
- Sony Broadway - Sony Class./Sony Music Soundtrax - Sony Classical - Sony Direct - Sony Discos - Sony Masterworks - Sony Music Special Products - Sony Music US (Latin) - Sony Portrait - Sony Wonder
I only wish it used a format that was closer to standard
What could possibly be closer to standard than MP3? It's the de facto standard of digital music these days.
You don't see many Ogg Vorbis portable players, do you? Or ogg vorbis files shared on Gnutella, for that matter (compared to the number of mp3 files shared).
Re:My Biased Opinion...
on
Perl & XML
·
· Score: 1
Why would your first choice be Java, when the above poster already mentioned that Perl's XML libraries are faster?
Perl is by no means a "legacy" language - it's still in development, and if I dare say, it's developing faster than Java. Look at the upcoming Perl 6.
I'm not saying that you should use Perl; I'm just curious as to why you would use Java and refuse to use anything else (when something else may be the best tool for the job).
Don't forget that some of the largest web apps out there (*cough* Slashcode *cough*) are in Perl.
It all depends on the *nix installer; that is one thing that is not at all common between *nixes.
At risk of being repetitive, I'd like to point out that Mac OS X is a *nix. I somehow have a hunch that it's easier to install than Windows XP.
Red Hat 7.3 is one linux distribution that is easier to install than Windows XP. In both cases, all you have to do is click "next" until you're done, for the most part.
Tricky part comes in (both for Red Hat 7.3 and Windows XP) if you have to repartition a hard drive... it's not any easier in Windows XP than it is in RedHat's installer. You still need to somewhat know what you're doing.
What it comes down to that makes RedHat easier, is that it installs, and then reboots. That's it, you're done.
Windows XP requires about 3 stages of pre-installing (copying files over), actual installing, and configuration, with rebooting in between each stage!
So yes, XP is a lot harder to install than some *nixes. I have friends that can do a lot with a computer, but can't install Win2k/XP.
I've "churned distros" for four years, not because I was trying to find an easy-to-use "desktop" distribution, but because I was trying to find a "zen-like easy-to-maintain slice of Computer Nirvana":)
I ended up using Debian of course. Now I'm just waiting for Woody, version 3.0, to come out.
By the way, the other distributions I tried: - Red Hat 4.0+, up to 7.3 - Slackware 3.x+, up to 8.0 - SUSE 4.x or so (haven't tried it since) - Mandrake 7.0 (the only distro that sucked due to motherboard problems... hence it was unusably slow) - Gentoo 1.0+, up to 1.3b (using it right now, actually... very nice, but high-maintainance)
- As one of my fellow ACs pointed out, Apple's back-end is just a pimped-out unix. At least Micro$oft can write its own OS and doesn't go converting to *nix when they realize it sucks.
So they just keep on sucking, rather than convert? I guess that's implied...
Would you please stop repeating this? I've seen it in four posts of yours in this story, and despite your trolling efforts, the kernel still functions.
Although you might consider it a "hacked-up" version of your beloved NewOS kernel, it does work.
Many other portions of the project have progressed steadily as well; the kernel is not the end-all of OS development. The filesystem and networking portions are quite developed already; the filesystem implementation used by OpenBeOS is faster than the real BeOS ever was.
Let's total up the components (all prices taken from Pricewatch at the moment, they do change though):
Pentium III 733mhz: $89 Pentium III motherboard: $31 ATX Case + 300w power supply: $24 GeForce 3 TI 500 graphics card (if anyone can approximate the XBox card to a closer match, do so): $127 (Audio built into motherboard) 10 GB 5400 rpm HD: estimated $35 (not listed on Pricewatch) 64 MB SDRAM: $11 100 Mbit ethernet card: $6
Total system cost: $323
This total cost is considerably more than the Xbox is currently priced.
Agreed. The way people lay out most web pages now, they'd be better off using Adobe Acrobat or something meant for page layout. A webpage is supposed to look different on any platform, at any resolution/color depth, on any display, GUI or CLI. From the beginning, everyone has used different browsers that rendered pages differently. The only reason it's a problem now is that people expect pages to look the same.
A well-designed page that renders correctly (but differently) on all platforms/browsers and presents the information well should be the goal for a web page.
If you're trying to make it look like a page in a print magazine, use Acrobat.
Is that a reference to Patrick McGoohan's "The Prisoner" TV show? I used to watch that, when my photo teacher would bring in episodes on tape (and then, because they were so mind-blowing, let us watch them instead of doing work in his class)!
Great show... I've seen the entire set on DVD for about $100, and I'm considering buying it.
Will corporations really take Apple seriously as a contender in the server market? This market has traditionally been dominated by Sun, among others. It seems by these performance graphs that Apple is really at the same level as the other major contenders as far as speed. Given that it has fewer CPU's, it is probably cheaper than some of the better-performing ones tested.
Will companies really start using Apple's Xserve to replace Sun or other servers?
Slashdot Mirror
As many others here have said, why would you want that in a laptop? Just curious... apparently you're the only one commenting here who's a potential purchaser of said Sony Vaio.
I think you are confusing SMP with something else.
A dual G4, or a dual anything, by it's very nature is SMP. SMP stands for symmetric multi-processing. Having more than one processor in a desktop machine generally means SMP.
And just for the record, both of those G4's have AltiVec as well. That's (afaik) an instruction set.
hehe... I get it now ;)
I don't get it... what is wrong with that picture?
The reason it "doesn't go full screen" is the same reason it "loves to put up nag screens to upgrade to pro". They want you to buy it, plain and simple.
QuickTime does not do full screen unless it is the pro version.
Since you mention that you have the pro version as well, I don't know why you are complaining about the lack of full screen and the nag screens.
The only complaints you have left are "it has a terrible UI" and "likes to screw with file associations and browser settings".
Now find me a media player for Windows that doesn't fit those qualifications. Do not reply to this and tell me Windows Media Player doesn't.
I don't think QuickTime is great. It may even be sub-par. But that's compared to other media players that I can only describe as "suffering from multiple terminal infectious diseases" (RealOne Player) or "as ugly as Louie Anderson from the waist down" (Windows Media Player).
Stone, and the plaques at reknowned eastern universities.
*cough* MIT *cough*
Umm... K is the first letter before L. Not to nitpick or anything.
:P
Otherwise it'd be the M Desktop Environment. Which would actually be pretty cool... Somebody should start that project
Remember, kids... the important part of the word "unitard" is tard.
As I replied to someone else, the story says MP3 in the title. That's where I got "mp3 format" from.
What is SHN? Is it a lossless/lossy compression?
Is it actually supported by any devices? Not even Ogg Vorbis has hardware support...
What would actually be nice is to have a device like this with a giant (120 GB or so) HD that could rip to uncompressed WAV if desired.
Sorry, I was going by the Slashdot story. Which is wrong. Maybe they should change it.
Ironic, considering Sony owns a huge record label (Sony Music) and is a member of the RIAA.
In fact, all of these Sony labels are members of the RIAA, according to their Members List:
- Sony Broadway
- Sony Class./Sony Music Soundtrax
- Sony Classical
- Sony Direct
- Sony Discos
- Sony Masterworks
- Sony Music Special Products
- Sony Music US (Latin)
- Sony Portrait
- Sony Wonder
I only wish it used a format that was closer to standard
What could possibly be closer to standard than MP3? It's the de facto standard of digital music these days.
You don't see many Ogg Vorbis portable players, do you? Or ogg vorbis files shared on Gnutella, for that matter (compared to the number of mp3 files shared).
Why would your first choice be Java, when the above poster already mentioned that Perl's XML libraries are faster?
Perl is by no means a "legacy" language - it's still in development, and if I dare say, it's developing faster than Java. Look at the upcoming Perl 6.
I'm not saying that you should use Perl; I'm just curious as to why you would use Java and refuse to use anything else (when something else may be the best tool for the job).
Don't forget that some of the largest web apps out there (*cough* Slashcode *cough*) are in Perl.
normal observers achieved the operation in seconds
You mean to tell me that it takes > 1 second for a non-colorblind person to determine color? I must be some kind of color genius.
Apparently, you didn't read the story properly.
The stated comic-book crossover would be Superman and Batman. Both are part of the DC universe, and are by DC comics.
Ironically, so is the Star Trek comic book.
"Kirk!"... "Khan!"...
Imagine "The Wrath of Khan" one page at a time.
"Kirk!"... "Khan!"...
It all depends on the *nix installer; that is one thing that is not at all common between *nixes.
At risk of being repetitive, I'd like to point out that Mac OS X is a *nix. I somehow have a hunch that it's easier to install than Windows XP.
Red Hat 7.3 is one linux distribution that is easier to install than Windows XP. In both cases, all you have to do is click "next" until you're done, for the most part.
Tricky part comes in (both for Red Hat 7.3 and Windows XP) if you have to repartition a hard drive... it's not any easier in Windows XP than it is in RedHat's installer. You still need to somewhat know what you're doing.
What it comes down to that makes RedHat easier, is that it installs, and then reboots. That's it, you're done.
Windows XP requires about 3 stages of pre-installing (copying files over), actual installing, and configuration, with rebooting in between each stage!
So yes, XP is a lot harder to install than some *nixes. I have friends that can do a lot with a computer, but can't install Win2k/XP.
I've "churned distros" for four years, not because I was trying to find an easy-to-use "desktop" distribution, but because I was trying to find a "zen-like easy-to-maintain slice of Computer Nirvana" :)
I ended up using Debian of course. Now I'm just waiting for Woody, version 3.0, to come out.
By the way, the other distributions I tried:
- Red Hat 4.0+, up to 7.3
- Slackware 3.x+, up to 8.0
- SUSE 4.x or so (haven't tried it since)
- Mandrake 7.0 (the only distro that sucked due to motherboard problems... hence it was unusably slow)
- Gentoo 1.0+, up to 1.3b (using it right now, actually... very nice, but high-maintainance)
- As one of my fellow ACs pointed out, Apple's back-end is just a pimped-out unix. At least Micro$oft can write its own OS and doesn't go converting to *nix when they realize it sucks.
So they just keep on sucking, rather than convert? I guess that's implied...
There's no functional kernel
Would you please stop repeating this? I've seen it in four posts of yours in this story, and despite your trolling efforts, the kernel still functions.
Although you might consider it a "hacked-up" version of your beloved NewOS kernel, it does work.
Many other portions of the project have progressed steadily as well; the kernel is not the end-all of OS development. The filesystem and networking portions are quite developed already; the filesystem implementation used by OpenBeOS is faster than the real BeOS ever was.
Or, if you're into Perl, dare I suggest... a camel? :)
Let's total up the components (all prices taken from Pricewatch at the moment, they do change though):
Pentium III 733mhz: $89
Pentium III motherboard: $31
ATX Case + 300w power supply: $24
GeForce 3 TI 500 graphics card (if anyone can approximate the XBox card to a closer match, do so): $127
(Audio built into motherboard)
10 GB 5400 rpm HD: estimated $35 (not listed on Pricewatch)
64 MB SDRAM: $11
100 Mbit ethernet card: $6
Total system cost: $323
This total cost is considerably more than the Xbox is currently priced.
Agreed. The way people lay out most web pages now, they'd be better off using Adobe Acrobat or something meant for page layout. A webpage is supposed to look different on any platform, at any resolution/color depth, on any display, GUI or CLI. From the beginning, everyone has used different browsers that rendered pages differently. The only reason it's a problem now is that people expect pages to look the same.
A well-designed page that renders correctly (but differently) on all platforms/browsers and presents the information well should be the goal for a web page.
If you're trying to make it look like a page in a print magazine, use Acrobat.
Just my $0.02.
Is that a reference to Patrick McGoohan's "The Prisoner" TV show? I used to watch that, when my photo teacher would bring in episodes on tape (and then, because they were so mind-blowing, let us watch them instead of doing work in his class)!
Great show... I've seen the entire set on DVD for about $100, and I'm considering buying it.
-- Reverius
Will corporations really take Apple seriously as a contender in the server market? This market has traditionally been dominated by Sun, among others. It seems by these performance graphs that Apple is really at the same level as the other major contenders as far as speed. Given that it has fewer CPU's, it is probably cheaper than some of the better-performing ones tested.
Will companies really start using Apple's Xserve to replace Sun or other servers?