You mean that it's Joe user's fault that his DSL connected PC got infected? What do you suggest we do about that?]
Joe User probably isn't a computer expert, and he isn't PAID to maintain security of a system. Yes, technically he's the admin of his own little PC and DSL connection.
But I believe the grandparent post was saying to blame "ADMINS," those whose job it is to stop this stuff.
It's their job to maintain proper security, apply patches, use recent virus software, watch over incoming / outgoing traffic and email, and lock down ports if necessary.
It's the large centers that really help spread the virus all over the dang place; ISP's, corporations, free email providers, etc.
Joe Use might spread a small number of people from his Outlook Express address book (who in turn infect another small number). These large data centers can spread hundreds or thousands of users within a few hours if they're not careful.
True. However, I think the more upper-level CPU's have a larger price difference.
Personally, I went with Intel in my last PC because the price difference was negligable, and I ended up with a rock solid machine (my VIA chipset before that was a nightmare). My friends didn't believe me until I showed them the receipts. I spent an extra $40 USD for a 2.4GHz P4 w/ 533 MHz FSB, and at the time, the 2.4 P4 was running cooler than the equivalent AMD (at least, my chipset, the otherone was a lot hotter).
It's all about performance, features, and stability for me now. Saving $50-$200 USD on a midrange system isn't a big deal for me now that I'm out of college and making a decent buck.
Athlon 64's appear to be rock solid, and have a feature I really want: Cool n Quiet. I like how they can cycle themselves down to lower the heat and (thus) noise. At this particular point in time, 64-bit capability means nothing to me.
When I upgrade next time (probably late next year), it'll depend on the quality of both sides. Maybe it'll be Intel, maybe it'll be AMD (probably AMD). But price won't be the most important factor (unless the difference is as big as it used to be).
I only ask because I've been hearing more and more horror stories about Asus motherboards. People have been saying their quality control has gone down the can.
Via is a much better solution, and they've contributed GPL'd drivers and support to the kernel developers. This makes their hardware much easier to deal with.
Some of us have been realy burned. As the grandparent has stated, VIA has had some really sh!tty chipsets and drivers in the past. I had to go through 3 VIA-based motherboards during the AMD T'Bird era to get a good one. VIA has pretty much lost a customer in me. I'm sure they're better now, but once burned, twice shy.
It was so bad that I went to Intel for my next rig (which I really didn't want to do). The last thing I wanted to deal with when using my main rig for work was crappy chipsets and crashes. My Intel rig has been rock solid.
My next rig will probably be whatever AMD CPU is out there with an nVidia chipset. If I had to choose now, I'd probably go for an nVidia-based motherboard with a socket 939 chipset (I don't mind shelling out the extra money). However, I probably won't be in the market until I can get a 4GHz CPU for around $300 USD or less. My rig is more than adequate for what I need, and will own whatever game I throw at it.
don't put too much faith into being able to keep your mainboard for the next upgrade, chances are you'll upgrade it anyway.
I agree, I upgrade my main rig every so often. However, by the time I do, my motherboard's chipset is already too old to support the good midrange CPU's out there.
I pretty much know going in that by the time I want to upgrade, I'm going to upgrade my motherboard as well.
However, this time I decided to go against it. I was at a P4 2.4GHz, and decided to up it a little for DOOM 3. So, I put a P4 3.06GHz CPU in my motherboard for the little extra horsepower and hyperthreading.
Next revision, which will be when I can get a 4GHz processor for a decent price, I'll probably go the AMD route again (I got burned with the AMD Thunderbird, no pun intended). At which point, I'll get an nVidia chipset motherboard and whatever incarnation of AMD's CPU is at 4GHz for around $300 USD.
MS might not be perfect, and their file formats suck. But, they aren't horrible. And most of the business world uses their stuff.
Are there better alternatives? Yes. OpenOffice is one of them.
A vast amount of data is transferred between businesses in Excel and what-not. It's a fact of life. There needs to be compatibility and inter-operability between everyone.
An open situation would be the BEST solution!!!
But, unless the business world all at once (or big chunks at a time) switch to an open standard, we're stuck using MS stuff.
On the bright side, Office has gotten a lot better and more stable since Office 1997 (that was a horrible version).
Yes, maybe, but we're not talking about one person or a small shop. Changing it in my company would require changing THOUSANDS of PC's in the US and Europe, as everyone has to be able to easily look at everyone else's results. Not to mention training.
Then, there's the fact that we'd have to worry about trading off features that we need.
For big corporations, switching for "business apps" isn't such a small thing to do. Especially Swiss ocmpanies, as they like company-uniformity.
Sorry if you're too busy being snotty to see the big picture of "migration difficulty" in big business.
CAD and other engineering apps usually have versions available for linux, or solaris. They are usually very expensive.
True, but I just mentioned CAD in passing. I'm sure they use a lot of other specialized stuff that grubs like us know nothing about.
Don't get me wrong, Linux can replace a lot of MS workstations out there now. But a lot of companies use software that isn't available at all on Linux. Maybe it's from a small firm, maybe it's not that well known outside the people that use it, maybe nobody's released a Linux version yet.
I'm just saying, that Lockheed probably had a good reason not to go with Linux on the "business app" workstations. They probably need to run some stuff under Windows, and want a modicrum of support (most vendors will not support their app if it's running under Wine or something).
I've had XP since before it was released in retail (OEM version was released a few months earlier).
Since that time (Fall of 2001), I've had one hard-crash; and that's because I was experimenting in overclocking my CPU. Beyond that, Opera has crashes on my a couple times a month, but I just start the app again and keep going (XP doesn't get taken down by a rogue app).
XP has been ROCK SOLID for me. No weird bugs, no hiccups, no problems. Runs moy software for work as well as games pretty without a single problem.
2000 was pretty solid for me as well, but XP has been more so. I woudn't have upgraded though had I not gotten a good deal.
A lot of it depends on hardware. If you have a bad revision of a motherboard or bad ram, you'll have more problems. But, my motherboard is revision 1.04 (4th revision), and all other parts are of high quality.
Now, before you start bashing me, I should tell you I have 3 computers: 1 Windows PC (gaming / work), 1 Linux PC (for experimenting with stuff), and 1 powerbook (use it for more general stuff).
Hate MS all you want for their business practices / idealogies / etc. But XP is pretty damn good.
The only sh!tty thing about XP is the activation feature.
If Real Networks reverse-engineered an iPod (though that would be pointless), and made their own product that played.mp4,.aac, AND.rm files, AND could interface with iTunes, then power to them.
But that's not what they did.
-----
They said "Can you make the iPod run.rm files? Pretty please with sugar on top?"
Apple kindly replied "No. Stop asking us."
So Real Networks said, "Ok, go to hell. One way or another you're iPod WILL run.rm files."
Then Real Networks hacked the iPod to run it.
"A HA!" yelled Real Networks. "Now, we can claim that.rm files can run on iPods, one of the most popular handheld devices ever! More people will want to use our proprietary format and people will license our tech for music stores. Our stock will go through the roof!"
Apple, realizing they'd been raped, claimed "What a bunch of a$$holes! Expect to hear from our attornies!"
-----
This wasn't some bored group of open source nuts that wanted to make their personal iPods run.ogg or something. Real Networks bypassed Apple's wishes and violated the DMCA for THEIR OWN PROFIT..rm files on iPods would make Real Networks more mainstream, and get more people to adopt the format, particularly for use in online music sales.
Real Networks tried to form a partnership or alliance to allow Real Media (.rm) files on the iPod, and perhaps do something with iTunes.
Apple rejected the idea. Personally, I'm glad, as I hate Real Media files. But, I digress.
So, Real Networks takes it into their owns hands, and provides a hack to allow.rm on the iPod. This violates a whole lot of things, besides just common cortesy: DMCA, copyright, a few others.
You can't make an analogy to this, and say, aftermarket car parts. Because a car isn't protected by copyrights or DMCA, and is built specifically to be modular for maintenance reasons. A company is allowed to make an alternator for a 1991 Oldsmobile Delta 88. However, you're not allowed (by law) to tamper with people's tech.
What Real Networks did was wrong, and I don't blame Apple for being ticked off.
They more or less said:
"You don't want us in your club, well screw you! We're going to go to your clubhouse anyway. Neenar Neenar Neeeeenar."
Hate the law all you want, I do. But, regardless, Real Networks is a bunch of jerks.
64-bit CPU's can process larger chunks of data at a time.
So, for Joe Sixpack, their Internet browsing, Word documents, and Quicken sessions will not see much of an improvement.
However, for processes that crunch a lot of data (databases, video processing, etc), you will see a big improvement. Perhaps gaming as well, though no 64-bit drivers are out yet to test the 64-bit version of Unreal 2004.
I LOVED my Aureal card. The dmo I listened to had a bee buzzing around you, and it was remarkable how well I was able to tell where the sound was coming from.
man, I wish Creative didn't gobble them up (and then do nothing with the tech).
Part of the problem is getting someone who has very little personal time to get into long-term gaming. While a HS or college student can get to lvl 10 in a couple of days, a hard working person that drags their feet home everyday will take a lot longer.
If Joe Sixpack comes home from a 10 hour day at work with a new copy of (insert MMORPG game here), how "hooked" is going to get if he has to spend the next week fighting bunnies or rats.
Again, the average wage-slave doesn't have oodles of time for gaming Monday->Friday. So, at best he'd only be able to put 1-3 hours a night (probably closer to 1.5). MAYBE, Joe will get 10 hours of playing during a week.
So as far as Joe's concerned, his first week or something is walking around beating rats with a club or something; not very addicting. Chances are he'll move onto a different game or give up on gaming all together.
What we need is a way to get the user's hooked. Start them off fighting some cooler low-level creatures (like orcs or something) so it's more interesting. Give him some real challenges. I'm not saying put a lvl 2 character against a lvl 30 dragon, but something more than just "kill da wabbit."
You've apparently never had an accident (or serveral very-near misses) because the other driver was on the cellphone.
My MAIN concern with talking on the cellphone is most don't use the earbud / headphone things.
Talking normally cuts peripheral vision by A LOT.
Think of it, you have your hand and phone on the side of your head. While this doesn't matter if you're just drive straight (or not an idiot), the instant you start turning / changing lanes / or entering a street, you're a dangerous weapon.
On one hand, it sounds stupid, especially when you consider all of the items you mentioned (billboards, talking to passengers, smoking, etc).
But on the other hand, not enough people know how much it cuts on their peripheral vision, and they drive as if nothing was out of the ordinary.
I support the law to ticket people using cellphones without headphones / ear pieces / speakers.
The only things I could think of wanting to know up-to-the-minute would be:
Stock prices (if I were day trading)
Weather (for when I commute)
Big news (it would have to be BIG for me to care, like 9/11 big)
traffic
Would I ever pay $750 for this? Hell no. And this is coming from a guy who loves to buy expensive gadgets.
However, another poster mentions to use a radio. Ehh, a radio will provide most of that info, but not when you want it, and maybe not to your area (like my zipcode or county).
But, there's always going to be people with too much money and too little common sense lined up to buy stuff like this.
But how is a location only accessable via float plane? I mean, if it's an island somewhere, surely a boat (sail or otherwise) could reach it, with a rowboat or zodiac to get you to shore.
I'm just curious. Does it have to do with restricted waterways or something? Or surrounded completely by coral reefs.
PC gaming died when GL code was added to Quake, it's a one-trick pony.
Ehh, I sort of agree, and sort of disagree. I didn't find Quake all that enjoyable. Technology-wise, it was neat, but I found "Duke Nukem 3d" way more enjoyable, and nicer to look at (even using a 3dFX card with Quake).
I think developers are focusing too much on eye candy and less on gameplay, with few notable exceptions like "Thief 3." And yes, most PC games aren't THAT original anymore.
A lot of console games are fun, but most (except Nintendo stuff) are also available on PC.
I think the reason consoles are doing so well is the same reason they've always done so well: it's easy to jump into.
With a console, there's no worrying about upgrading, will this support it, do I need new drivers, etc. Joe Sixpack just has to worry he's buying the game for the correct console, and he's set to play. Even people who know nothing about PC's know they can be overly complicated to run and maintain.
Consoles are cheaper, require little / no maintenance, and can be run by their 6-year-olds. If, a few years down the line they want to "upgrade," they buy the next version for a few hunded dollars.
If PC's want to trounce on Console sales, they need to compete in SOME way. PC's (the unit itself) are way more expensive than consoles and more complicated. Right now, PC games are around as expensive as console games. Also, you can easily rent games for the consoles, or join renting clubs, to play a game and discard it without shelling out the full price.
If PC's want to compete (and let's ignore the obvious "make better games" solution), they need to make games cheaper, or offer more good demos on CD's or something to get the word out.
I meant "PCI Express video cards are hard to find in retail."
I already know which motherboard I'm getting, and from where. But I'm having a hard time finding the PCI Express video card I want (nVidia 6800 series).
I had a PII 233 when Quake 3 came out. But I had a VOODOO 3 card in there. That game ran like silk on my machine.
Meanwhile, my friends were bragging to me that their machines were faster (PII 300's with stock video cards). They nearly sh!t a brick when they saw it run on mine (their puny 8MB Rage cards sucked).
However, you're only siting one example. Quake (the original) really needed a Pentium to play well. At that time, 486's were still more common than the Pentiums, and Quake crawled on them.
DOOM 1 & 2 REQUIRED a 386 w/ 4MB Ram, but it ran pretty choppy. A 486 ran it like silk.
In the end, I don't know.
On one hand, we have previewers saying it runs well on low-end systems, and that the engine is very scalable.
On the other hand, the "benchmarks" were running HIGH end rigs (obscene amount of RAM, very fast CPU's), and the benchmarks were good, but not great.
I'm torn as to whether or not I should upgrade now. I have the funds put away for almost a whole new HIGH END system, but I don't know if it's worth it. While a high-end machine will handle DOOM3, can we say the same about the later games that will utilize the engine? They might not be as efficient with their maps and what-not, and you might need like a 4GHz rig to run them in all their glory.
I want to get a "PCI Express" capable motherboard now, so I can upgrade it later if needed, but it's hard to find them in retail.
I have a P4 2.4 w. 533 MHz FSB, 1GB Ram, and ATI 9800XT; I consider it a mid-range machine capable of handling mostly anything out there today. The closest system they had to mine in the "benchmarks" TROUNCED my specs, and yet 1024x768 at medium quality (with no AA or AF) ran at like 50FPS. That means mine will be lucky to get like 40FPS at low settings.
"Do I really need all that for a gaming machine, though? I mean, are save-games so important that I really need RAID?"
Games hit the harddrive for 3 reasons: 1) Save-games (no big deal) 2) Loading maps (sometimes a pain in the ass) 3) Accessing the resources (it does it more if you have less ram).
RAID would only come in handy if the game you're playing has really long load-times, or if you're hitting a cache-file a lot.
For saved games, yeh, it's pretty useless.
But as far as price goes, RAID is pretty cheap. A lot of motherboards come with it now, particularly those with SATA ports.
At that point, you'd just need to buy 2 SATA drives (like, 2 80GB drives), and you'd have a fast RAID solution storing 160GB.
I'm considering going that route with my next PC. RAID 2 smallish SATA hard drives together for my main system, and back stuff up on a 3rd drive (probably a slow 5,200 RPM drive).
That's because just about everyone that isn't part of the big uber-federation is pretty much poor. Hell, in one episode they go to a "core planet," and it looked more technilogically advanced than some Star Trek sets. The hospital was very hi-tech, everything was shiny and metal, and flying vehicles were all over the place.
The back story (from the pilot) went something like this.
- They had to pretty much evacuate Earth some time in the past. - The US and China had the most ships, thus their culture and languages are prevalent. One neat part of the show was them cursing in Mandarin Chinese. - They threw as many people onto the ships as they could, with as little supplies it would take. - They found planets that would support life, and dropped the ships on them, and pretty much washed their hands of them. - Most had to survive in new environment by building things from scratch, and scrapping their ship - Other than the "upper class" citizens of core planets, most people are thus forced to live a poor existence a la "western style' - It's easier to build / maintain a Colt.45 than a lazer rifle if you don't have the tech.
Sure, the tech is out there for them to have FTL travel AND cloning AND nicer kitchens. But, most can't afford it. So they live on what they got.
Slashdot Mirror
You mean that it's Joe user's fault that his DSL connected PC got infected? What do you suggest we do about that?]
Joe User probably isn't a computer expert, and he isn't PAID to maintain security of a system. Yes, technically he's the admin of his own little PC and DSL connection.
But I believe the grandparent post was saying to blame "ADMINS," those whose job it is to stop this stuff.
It's their job to maintain proper security, apply patches, use recent virus software, watch over incoming / outgoing traffic and email, and lock down ports if necessary.
It's the large centers that really help spread the virus all over the dang place; ISP's, corporations, free email providers, etc.
Joe Use might spread a small number of people from his Outlook Express address book (who in turn infect another small number). These large data centers can spread hundreds or thousands of users within a few hours if they're not careful.
True. However, I think the more upper-level CPU's have a larger price difference.
Personally, I went with Intel in my last PC because the price difference was negligable, and I ended up with a rock solid machine (my VIA chipset before that was a nightmare). My friends didn't believe me until I showed them the receipts. I spent an extra $40 USD for a 2.4GHz P4 w/ 533 MHz FSB, and at the time, the 2.4 P4 was running cooler than the equivalent AMD (at least, my chipset, the otherone was a lot hotter).
It's all about performance, features, and stability for me now. Saving $50-$200 USD on a midrange system isn't a big deal for me now that I'm out of college and making a decent buck.
Athlon 64's appear to be rock solid, and have a feature I really want: Cool n Quiet. I like how they can cycle themselves down to lower the heat and (thus) noise. At this particular point in time, 64-bit capability means nothing to me.
When I upgrade next time (probably late next year), it'll depend on the quality of both sides. Maybe it'll be Intel, maybe it'll be AMD (probably AMD). But price won't be the most important factor (unless the difference is as big as it used to be).
If i may ask, which brand do you recommend now?
I only ask because I've been hearing more and more horror stories about Asus motherboards. People have been saying their quality control has gone down the can.
Via is a much better solution, and they've contributed GPL'd drivers and support to the kernel developers. This makes their hardware much easier to deal with.
Some of us have been realy burned. As the grandparent has stated, VIA has had some really sh!tty chipsets and drivers in the past. I had to go through 3 VIA-based motherboards during the AMD T'Bird era to get a good one. VIA has pretty much lost a customer in me. I'm sure they're better now, but once burned, twice shy.
It was so bad that I went to Intel for my next rig (which I really didn't want to do). The last thing I wanted to deal with when using my main rig for work was crappy chipsets and crashes. My Intel rig has been rock solid.
My next rig will probably be whatever AMD CPU is out there with an nVidia chipset. If I had to choose now, I'd probably go for an nVidia-based motherboard with a socket 939 chipset (I don't mind shelling out the extra money). However, I probably won't be in the market until I can get a 4GHz CPU for around $300 USD or less. My rig is more than adequate for what I need, and will own whatever game I throw at it.
don't put too much faith into being able to keep your mainboard for the next upgrade, chances are you'll upgrade it anyway.
I agree, I upgrade my main rig every so often. However, by the time I do, my motherboard's chipset is already too old to support the good midrange CPU's out there.
I pretty much know going in that by the time I want to upgrade, I'm going to upgrade my motherboard as well.
However, this time I decided to go against it. I was at a P4 2.4GHz, and decided to up it a little for DOOM 3. So, I put a P4 3.06GHz CPU in my motherboard for the little extra horsepower and hyperthreading.
Next revision, which will be when I can get a 4GHz processor for a decent price, I'll probably go the AMD route again (I got burned with the AMD Thunderbird, no pun intended). At which point, I'll get an nVidia chipset motherboard and whatever incarnation of AMD's CPU is at 4GHz for around $300 USD.
The Mac version will be available, just not right away. They have to finish some changes to make it compatible.
Linux binaries should be available soon in downloadable format (to use with your DOOM 3 discs).
Mac is slightly further down the horizon.
As for why they chose Quicktime, I have no idea.
Wow, your anti-MS-zealousy is showing.
MS might not be perfect, and their file formats suck. But, they aren't horrible. And most of the business world uses their stuff.
Are there better alternatives? Yes. OpenOffice is one of them.
A vast amount of data is transferred between businesses in Excel and what-not. It's a fact of life. There needs to be compatibility and inter-operability between everyone.
An open situation would be the BEST solution!!!
But, unless the business world all at once (or big chunks at a time) switch to an open standard, we're stuck using MS stuff.
On the bright side, Office has gotten a lot better and more stable since Office 1997 (that was a horrible version).
Word sucks, but Excel isn't that bad.
Yes, maybe, but we're not talking about one person or a small shop. Changing it in my company would require changing THOUSANDS of PC's in the US and Europe, as everyone has to be able to easily look at everyone else's results. Not to mention training.
Then, there's the fact that we'd have to worry about trading off features that we need.
For big corporations, switching for "business apps" isn't such a small thing to do. Especially Swiss ocmpanies, as they like company-uniformity.
Sorry if you're too busy being snotty to see the big picture of "migration difficulty" in big business.
CAD and other engineering apps usually have versions available for linux, or solaris. They are usually very expensive.
True, but I just mentioned CAD in passing. I'm sure they use a lot of other specialized stuff that grubs like us know nothing about.
Don't get me wrong, Linux can replace a lot of MS workstations out there now. But a lot of companies use software that isn't available at all on Linux. Maybe it's from a small firm, maybe it's not that well known outside the people that use it, maybe nobody's released a Linux version yet.
I'm just saying, that Lockheed probably had a good reason not to go with Linux on the "business app" workstations. They probably need to run some stuff under Windows, and want a modicrum of support (most vendors will not support their app if it's running under Wine or something).
Business Apps don't necessarily mean "MS Office."
We consider business apps where I work:
Bioinformatic software
Data Analysis software
specialized inventory management software
I'm sure Lockheed uses CAD as well as a plethora of engineering apps that have no-where-near equivalent versions in Linux.
Really?
I've had XP since before it was released in retail (OEM version was released a few months earlier).
Since that time (Fall of 2001), I've had one hard-crash; and that's because I was experimenting in overclocking my CPU. Beyond that, Opera has crashes on my a couple times a month, but I just start the app again and keep going (XP doesn't get taken down by a rogue app).
XP has been ROCK SOLID for me. No weird bugs, no hiccups, no problems. Runs moy software for work as well as games pretty without a single problem.
2000 was pretty solid for me as well, but XP has been more so. I woudn't have upgraded though had I not gotten a good deal.
A lot of it depends on hardware. If you have a bad revision of a motherboard or bad ram, you'll have more problems. But, my motherboard is revision 1.04 (4th revision), and all other parts are of high quality.
Now, before you start bashing me, I should tell you I have 3 computers: 1 Windows PC (gaming / work), 1 Linux PC (for experimenting with stuff), and 1 powerbook (use it for more general stuff).
Hate MS all you want for their business practices / idealogies / etc. But XP is pretty damn good.
The only sh!tty thing about XP is the activation feature.
Difference.
.mp4, .aac, AND .rm files, AND could interface with iTunes, then power to them.
.rm files? Pretty please with sugar on top?"
.rm files."
.rm files can run on iPods, one of the most popular handheld devices ever! More people will want to use our proprietary format and people will license our tech for music stores. Our stock will go through the roof!"
.ogg or something. Real Networks bypassed Apple's wishes and violated the DMCA for THEIR OWN PROFIT. .rm files on iPods would make Real Networks more mainstream, and get more people to adopt the format, particularly for use in online music sales.
You're reference would be like the following:
-----
If Real Networks reverse-engineered an iPod (though that would be pointless), and made their own product that played
But that's not what they did.
-----
They said "Can you make the iPod run
Apple kindly replied "No. Stop asking us."
So Real Networks said, "Ok, go to hell. One way or another you're iPod WILL run
Then Real Networks hacked the iPod to run it.
"A HA!" yelled Real Networks. "Now, we can claim that
Apple, realizing they'd been raped, claimed "What a bunch of a$$holes! Expect to hear from our attornies!"
-----
This wasn't some bored group of open source nuts that wanted to make their personal iPods run
Real Networks tried to form a partnership or alliance to allow Real Media (.rm) files on the iPod, and perhaps do something with iTunes.
.rm on the iPod. This violates a whole lot of things, besides just common cortesy: DMCA, copyright, a few others.
Apple rejected the idea. Personally, I'm glad, as I hate Real Media files. But, I digress.
So, Real Networks takes it into their owns hands, and provides a hack to allow
You can't make an analogy to this, and say, aftermarket car parts. Because a car isn't protected by copyrights or DMCA, and is built specifically to be modular for maintenance reasons. A company is allowed to make an alternator for a 1991 Oldsmobile Delta 88. However, you're not allowed (by law) to tamper with people's tech.
What Real Networks did was wrong, and I don't blame Apple for being ticked off.
They more or less said:
"You don't want us in your club, well screw you! We're going to go to your clubhouse anyway. Neenar Neenar Neeeeenar."
Hate the law all you want, I do. But, regardless, Real Networks is a bunch of jerks.
64-bit CPU's can process larger chunks of data at a time.
So, for Joe Sixpack, their Internet browsing, Word documents, and Quicken sessions will not see much of an improvement.
However, for processes that crunch a lot of data (databases, video processing, etc), you will see a big improvement. Perhaps gaming as well, though no 64-bit drivers are out yet to test the 64-bit version of Unreal 2004.
I LOVED my Aureal card. The dmo I listened to had a bee buzzing around you, and it was remarkable how well I was able to tell where the sound was coming from.
man, I wish Creative didn't gobble them up (and then do nothing with the tech).
I thought iRiver had a product that did most of those things (not firewire).
It's nice, but if I were in the market for an mp3 player, I think iTunes compatibility would win me over (and thus I would buy an iPod).
Yeh, but.
Part of the problem is getting someone who has very little personal time to get into long-term gaming. While a HS or college student can get to lvl 10 in a couple of days, a hard working person that drags their feet home everyday will take a lot longer.
If Joe Sixpack comes home from a 10 hour day at work with a new copy of (insert MMORPG game here), how "hooked" is going to get if he has to spend the next week fighting bunnies or rats.
Again, the average wage-slave doesn't have oodles of time for gaming Monday->Friday. So, at best he'd only be able to put 1-3 hours a night (probably closer to 1.5). MAYBE, Joe will get 10 hours of playing during a week.
So as far as Joe's concerned, his first week or something is walking around beating rats with a club or something; not very addicting. Chances are he'll move onto a different game or give up on gaming all together.
What we need is a way to get the user's hooked. Start them off fighting some cooler low-level creatures (like orcs or something) so it's more interesting. Give him some real challenges. I'm not saying put a lvl 2 character against a lvl 30 dragon, but something more than just "kill da wabbit."
Then, Joe will get into the game.
You've apparently never had an accident (or serveral very-near misses) because the other driver was on the cellphone.
My MAIN concern with talking on the cellphone is most don't use the earbud / headphone things.
Talking normally cuts peripheral vision by A LOT.
Think of it, you have your hand and phone on the side of your head. While this doesn't matter if you're just drive straight (or not an idiot), the instant you start turning / changing lanes / or entering a street, you're a dangerous weapon.
On one hand, it sounds stupid, especially when you consider all of the items you mentioned (billboards, talking to passengers, smoking, etc).
But on the other hand, not enough people know how much it cuts on their peripheral vision, and they drive as if nothing was out of the ordinary.
I support the law to ticket people using cellphones without headphones / ear pieces / speakers.
Would I ever pay $750 for this? Hell no. And this is coming from a guy who loves to buy expensive gadgets.
However, another poster mentions to use a radio. Ehh, a radio will provide most of that info, but not when you want it, and maybe not to your area (like my zipcode or county).
But, there's always going to be people with too much money and too little common sense lined up to buy stuff like this.
Not to doubt your story...
But how is a location only accessable via float plane? I mean, if it's an island somewhere, surely a boat (sail or otherwise) could reach it, with a rowboat or zodiac to get you to shore.
I'm just curious. Does it have to do with restricted waterways or something? Or surrounded completely by coral reefs.
Again, I'm actually curious, not doubting you.
PC gaming died when GL code was added to Quake, it's a one-trick pony.
Ehh, I sort of agree, and sort of disagree. I didn't find Quake all that enjoyable. Technology-wise, it was neat, but I found "Duke Nukem 3d" way more enjoyable, and nicer to look at (even using a 3dFX card with Quake).
I think developers are focusing too much on eye candy and less on gameplay, with few notable exceptions like "Thief 3." And yes, most PC games aren't THAT original anymore.
A lot of console games are fun, but most (except Nintendo stuff) are also available on PC.
I think the reason consoles are doing so well is the same reason they've always done so well: it's easy to jump into.
With a console, there's no worrying about upgrading, will this support it, do I need new drivers, etc. Joe Sixpack just has to worry he's buying the game for the correct console, and he's set to play. Even people who know nothing about PC's know they can be overly complicated to run and maintain.
Consoles are cheaper, require little / no maintenance, and can be run by their 6-year-olds. If, a few years down the line they want to "upgrade," they buy the next version for a few hunded dollars.
If PC's want to trounce on Console sales, they need to compete in SOME way. PC's (the unit itself) are way more expensive than consoles and more complicated. Right now, PC games are around as expensive as console games. Also, you can easily rent games for the consoles, or join renting clubs, to play a game and discard it without shelling out the full price.
If PC's want to compete (and let's ignore the obvious "make better games" solution), they need to make games cheaper, or offer more good demos on CD's or something to get the word out.
CORRECTION...
I meant "PCI Express video cards are hard to find in retail."
I already know which motherboard I'm getting, and from where. But I'm having a hard time finding the PCI Express video card I want (nVidia 6800 series).
Tell me about it.
I had a PII 233 when Quake 3 came out. But I had a VOODOO 3 card in there. That game ran like silk on my machine.
Meanwhile, my friends were bragging to me that their machines were faster (PII 300's with stock video cards). They nearly sh!t a brick when they saw it run on mine (their puny 8MB Rage cards sucked).
However, you're only siting one example. Quake (the original) really needed a Pentium to play well. At that time, 486's were still more common than the Pentiums, and Quake crawled on them.
DOOM 1 & 2 REQUIRED a 386 w/ 4MB Ram, but it ran pretty choppy. A 486 ran it like silk.
In the end, I don't know.
On one hand, we have previewers saying it runs well on low-end systems, and that the engine is very scalable.
On the other hand, the "benchmarks" were running HIGH end rigs (obscene amount of RAM, very fast CPU's), and the benchmarks were good, but not great.
I'm torn as to whether or not I should upgrade now. I have the funds put away for almost a whole new HIGH END system, but I don't know if it's worth it. While a high-end machine will handle DOOM3, can we say the same about the later games that will utilize the engine? They might not be as efficient with their maps and what-not, and you might need like a 4GHz rig to run them in all their glory.
I want to get a "PCI Express" capable motherboard now, so I can upgrade it later if needed, but it's hard to find them in retail.
I have a P4 2.4 w. 533 MHz FSB, 1GB Ram, and ATI 9800XT; I consider it a mid-range machine capable of handling mostly anything out there today. The closest system they had to mine in the "benchmarks" TROUNCED my specs, and yet 1024x768 at medium quality (with no AA or AF) ran at like 50FPS. That means mine will be lucky to get like 40FPS at low settings.
"Do I really need all that for a gaming machine, though? I mean, are save-games so important that I really need RAID?"
Games hit the harddrive for 3 reasons:
1) Save-games (no big deal)
2) Loading maps (sometimes a pain in the ass)
3) Accessing the resources (it does it more if you have less ram).
RAID would only come in handy if the game you're playing has really long load-times, or if you're hitting a cache-file a lot.
For saved games, yeh, it's pretty useless.
But as far as price goes, RAID is pretty cheap. A lot of motherboards come with it now, particularly those with SATA ports.
At that point, you'd just need to buy 2 SATA drives (like, 2 80GB drives), and you'd have a fast RAID solution storing 160GB.
I'm considering going that route with my next PC. RAID 2 smallish SATA hard drives together for my main system, and back stuff up on a 3rd drive (probably a slow 5,200 RPM drive).
That's because just about everyone that isn't part of the big uber-federation is pretty much poor. Hell, in one episode they go to a "core planet," and it looked more technilogically advanced than some Star Trek sets. The hospital was very hi-tech, everything was shiny and metal, and flying vehicles were all over the place.
.45 than a lazer rifle if you don't have the tech.
The back story (from the pilot) went something like this.
- They had to pretty much evacuate Earth some time in the past.
- The US and China had the most ships, thus their culture and languages are prevalent. One neat part of the show was them cursing in Mandarin Chinese.
- They threw as many people onto the ships as they could, with as little supplies it would take.
- They found planets that would support life, and dropped the ships on them, and pretty much washed their hands of them.
- Most had to survive in new environment by building things from scratch, and scrapping their ship
- Other than the "upper class" citizens of core planets, most people are thus forced to live a poor existence a la "western style'
- It's easier to build / maintain a Colt
Sure, the tech is out there for them to have FTL travel AND cloning AND nicer kitchens. But, most can't afford it. So they live on what they got.