You're ridiculous. The chart you started this thread with is GLOBAL market share. The blurb clearly delineates US-based market share preference for the iPhone, and given AT&T is a US-based carrier, the share of Symbian OS globally is a silly thing to compare against. Note this chunk:
"Considering Apple's gadget is currently the most popular handset in the U.S., its exclusive carrier's inability/unwillingness to support the device in the country's largest market is pretty huge news. If this proves true, I'd expect curtains for AT&T's exclusivity deal when it comes up for renewal.""
Given this, RIM is actually the favorite. I did no digging into the source of the data, but it appeared in numerous places and seemed to be well reviewed. It does not include Droid as it was published in late October 2009.
It also proves wrong the 1-2% commenter. iPhone is quite popular in US, but RIM still holds the edge.
Your argument is out of context. You can not compare intentionally malicious methods, like worms, with an intentionally educational or informational which is certainly not a malignant one. In this case, the proper method to do what MOAB is doing is to actually work with the developers directly, or Apple regarding OS issues. They can *also* post them to their site, but to just throw them up there as if they were gotchas....its publicity whoring.
Your argument boils down to bad OS karma. That's pretty weak. Apple doesn't cover up the bugs, they go and fix them quickly and accurately. Apple is worrying about the bottom line more than the customer? Have you ever heard of Microsoft?
And how do you figure OS X is a gaping security hole? Have you even paused for a moment to compare the issues that come out regularly for all OS? This is nothing compared to Windows's issues.
Incorrect. The newer, especially 5G, iPod spec states you can do anything between 12 and 30 VDC.
The reason for locking into the iPod is because the airlines will be buying equipment from the in-flight entertainment vendor that will include software to seamlessly interface with the iPod, ie, loading all the information of what you have on the iPod. They will authenticate and have access to iPod audio and video through the 30-pin connector on the bottom. The in-flight software will have a nice iPod-ish interface to access your device while your device sits in a cradle in the seatback in front of you.
Thats why it won't be universal, as you would have no way of knowing how to interface the UI in front of you with whatever device, format, size, filesystem, you had brought on board.
It would be theoretically possible to charge a laptop, very slowly, from this 30-pin header if you rolled your own interposer cable to translate the power over, but it won't output enough current to power your backlight at anything below very dim. If you were playing games of video, it wouldn't have a net charge from that cable.
I took the test in Pascal about 6 years ago. I don't really understand why they moved it to Java. It seems to me, at that age, the fundamentals of programming basics are fairly important. I almost wish it would stay at C or Pascal for a while. While Java is nice and all (lots of creature comfort built in), it seems like moving backward from Java to something less comfortable (low-level C coding in the Linux kernel perhaps) is counter-intuitive. When you have the basics, extending to Java seems easy. Vice versa doesn't seem a pretty picture....
The idea behind the iMac is to fill in the middle niche in their product line. The Firewire 800 and all the fancier jazz, comes on the higher-end models (G5, Powerbook). The iBook and iMac are in the middle, and you can still pick up OS 9 compat. G4s and the eMac at the low end. So the idea is to appeal to people who probably will be completely happy with Firewire 400. If you're doing something that really needs 800, they want you in the G5 line or Powerbook.
It might sound crazy, but that's how they operate. Apple isn't just selling the hardware though. They tend to cut fewer corners in their hardware designs, and they are aware their hardware is more expensive. They are selling the OS, the reliability, and the longetivity.
I have two windows boxes, a linux, a BSD, and six Macs. I use OS X daily, but I can tell you all my old Macs are still in service, and going strong. I cant say that about my older Windows machines (linux has this sort of survivability though). Apple has an interesting market strategy, but I don't think that the computers are dead in 3-4 years. It's a facinating thing to watch.
Nope, iTunes was basically a revamped version of Casady & Greene's Sound Jam MP3 player. Apple acquired the SoundJam code to create iTunes, and Jeff Robbin, who created SoundJam, works (or worked) for Apple.
I can't imagine 600 Dell boxes costing 38 million, so I'm under the impression that planning, design, construction, maintenance, etc. add to the price of the servers significantly.
I think a big part of the "cost" factor is also in power consumption, not to discount how much it costs to contract Cray engineers. The G3/G4/G5 processors all use less power than an Intel/AMD/etc. alternative. When you're powering 600+ boxes, and using gobs of processing power, 24/7, 365, you have to consider how much it will cost to keep it all running for a few years. Schools consider this (businesses don't, typically) because everything needs to fit into the operating budget, dictated by the tuition cost plus the endowment.
Should point you to the 92 or so MB file...if you have the bandwidth...
Re:Not the fastest anymore
on
G5s Start Shipping
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
well a quick look now shows that Intel have since then continued ramping up the old processors and these G5's aren't actually the fastest machines now you can actually buy them
A quick look where? These OS topics quickly desolve into unsubstantiated ramblings, so please post links not opinions...
No, it's not too complicated. The whole point of his article (and he mentions the low cost of Linux), is that the Macs take far less HUMAN overhead. Last I checked, even $1000 more for a Mac is nothing compared to what you pay for an IT professional ($50,000 +?). Im not saying it's a one-to-one savings, but when you throw in all the human costs, it starts to go up. Macs use less power, and that is multiplicative with the number of machines you have. More employees (IT professionals) have salary, benefits, retirements, infrastructure for payroll, HR, and on and on. He makes a valid point. I'd definitely like to see my entire school-wide infrastructure go Mac. I think it'd make it a whole lot more efficient.
The campus has about 30-40% Macs in labs and offices. The rest is pretty much windows, with some Sun thrown in the mix for the CS dept. Last I worked for them, they had one Mac person for all their needs, and about 10 Windows people. Im not exagerrating. 10:1. That's a huge difference in my book.
I really don't simpathize with the older iPod owners. It was the functionality offered at the time of purchase. If you are really itching for a the functionality, you have a couple options...
1) When the new 30GB came out, I sold my 20GB touch-wheel for almost $225. That made the 30GB 'upgrade' almost nothing. A lot of people with pay $200 for a 20GB MP3 player that is still better than all the competition, and acts like a tiny Firewire disk.
2) Complain, sign petitions, and try to get Apple to change policy.
3) Be content in the fact that you still have a 20GB MP3 player that is really cool, and sounds good. It is still better than what the other companies are offering currently, and you'll get many more years of life from it.
4) Shell out the cash and give the used 20GB iPod as a gift to a friend/relative.
Oh come on. We'll hand you a medal for your extensive debate skills, and then we'll get back on target. Thanks for handing me zero points, that's nice of you and all...
My point was past that...it dealt with a history of poor policy choices in the middle-east. It has nothing to do with revisionist history. It has everything to do with signs that point to further mistakes in dealing with a particular part of the world, and the futures market on middle-east politics and terrorism has ever indication that we still don't get it...
Oh, and congratulations on your 8 years of debate in high school and college...
Revisionist history? You've been following far too much American propoganda, and Fox News. I also didn't say anything was Isreal's fault, I said that we should examine our own responsibility when we call people terrorists? Those arab-israeli's you're referring to are very few in number compared to the Israeli population, and the land in question was occupied by Israel after the mandate that created Israel was set in action. In the occupied territories, there are less than 100,000 Israelis living amongst millions of palestinians. Your arguement is pure propaganda. Revisionist history is also pure bull-shit. That's a catch-phrase offered by neo-conservatives to put spin on criticism of past issues.
Your "six-nation" anti-israel thing is funny too. Who armed some of those countries? What about when Rumsfeld was shaking hands with Sadaam back when we wanted them to fight Iran, after we helped force the Iranian government out in the first place? This isn't revisionism, this is examining the facts and owning up to failed middle-east policy that we need to understand in order to set it straight. I'm saying that in the same way this "betting" on terrorism and political upheavel in the middle-east is poor policy, our past policy is equally as bad, and we need to change our tack when attempting to intervene.
Incidently, how did the 400,000 arabs who fled Israel at the behest of the Arab states end up being 3.6 billion in 50 years? Also, what happens to the 1+ million Jews who were thrown out of Arab states following the creation of Israel?
No one said 3.6 Billion. That's more than the world's population total. If you were thinking 3.6 million, that may be acurate, and the reason for that is the Isreali government. They will grant anyone citizenship if they can prove remote ties to Judaism.
As for the reason they left? No, the Arab states did not tell them to leave all together. Point is, 60 years ago, there was no Isreal. I have no issues with Jews, Arabs, or any other religious or ethnic group. My point is that the issues in the middle-east stem strongly from our arrogant view that a bunch of western states could transplant a million people on top of another culture, and it would just "work out."
The previous poster commented on how much we spend compared to other continents, well, Im not arguing that, but I wasn't talking about aid and relief to other countries. You have to understand a lot of that spending ends up working through the WTO, and there are ups and downs to that capitalist venture. What I'm saying is that our policies around the world are neither benevolent, nor understanding. We have to understand that other cultures value different values, and we must respect their right to live their lives. Case in point: France disagrees on our preemptive war, so now all us Americans boycott, bash, and badmouth France. Why? Because they disagree with us. I missed the point in time when God granted the US the "You're always right, no matter what anyone else says" card. What if we're wrong?
The reason why this is sick is because next time you read that some coward terrorist decided to blow himself up on a Tel Aviv bus, killing him/herself and 15 schoolchildren
So you're saying when we kicked those "terrorists" out of their houses and told them new people were living there, they have no right to fight back? If I kicked you out of your house, told you to go somewhere else, and I was gonna kick back on your couch and watch your plasma screen, you wouldn't be at all angry? And then when you went to the police, they said "tough shit," patted you on the back and told you to go work for me to make a few lousy bucks and live in squalor, then you were happy? So, you would NEVER think about hurting me, watching you plasma screen and swimming in your pool? You would actually just let me be and go live in a shitty, crumbling apartment?
Who are the terrorists? Has it ever occured to our government (US) that spending money on fixing the reasons why anit-american/western sentiments are fueling terrorism, and not to throw technology and legislation at this. This is a sick idea, and I hope the American public has a fire-sale in 2004, cleaning the senate and house out, kicking the Pres. out, and send a big "We're sorry" sign to the rest of the world...
I havent used the iTunes Music Store at all, but I think it seems to be FAR superior to this BuyMusic.com implementation. I saw a demo at one of the Apple Stores, and you can deauthorize, and re-authorize any computer. It makes it pretty easy, I'd imagine, to reinstall the entire OS and software, and just pick right up with your purchased music. Has anyone used both services that could provide a head-to-head comparison?
So after it was mentioned in the intro to the story, I looked at this BuyMusic.com, and read their terms of sale....man, this is a shitty music service...
Content Use Rules. All downloaded music, images, video, artwork, text, software and other copyrightable materials ("Content") are sublicensed to End Users and not sold, notwithstanding use of the terms "sell," "purchase," "order," or "buy" on the Site or this Agreement.
Your Digital Download sublicense is nonexclusive, nontransferable, nonsublicenseable, limited and for use only within the United States. End users may play the Digital Downloads an unlimited number of times on the same registered personal computer to which the Digital Download is originally downloaded.
So are you saying I don't actually own what I'm "buying" on their site?
How can you unlicense your computer too? So if I get a new machine, I lose all my songs!? I couldn't find any mention of switching "primary computers" so that I can keep my music when I upgrade my machine. What about the next time I have to install a fresh version of XP over my current install? Has anyone checked out this service?
This article sucks. Misuse of ANY search engine, no matter the type, subject, content, or algorithm will lead to poor results. Who searches for gardening techniques using just the search term "flowers." Of course you won't find shit.
If you used, oh, maybe: flowers gardening tulips garden -buy
You would come out head and shoulders above what they claim are "google holes." Now I know Google has some weaknesses, and it's bad to really only have one search engine to turn to, but you have to RTFM and look at the search tips on ways to use a search engine. This article is weak, and filled with FUD. A real examination of the algorithm with a robust set of search terms would have been better...
I would assume that lower power FM radio stations would have lower overhead costs (power being one of them). This could allow for a subculture of small radio stations similar to public-access cult-followed TV shows.
Asking a bunch of technology-aware, most likely above average on the educational scale, daily-computer using "geeks" why no one understands our jargon, is like the guy who always yells at me for not doing my own taxes. I'm not freaking interested in my own taxes, and it's not worth my personal time, but it's worth about $75 for my accountant-friend to do 'em for me. Why doesn't everyone understand all the physics jargon?!?!? It governs our every movement....
Well, some people are cut out for different things. A fellow graduate student in the English department can talk circles around me about certain authors, but we study different things and we understand each other's spoutings to a very small extent. It's not a crime to not know these things, so quit the "Ignorance won't ever be illegal" garbage. You can't know everything. Some people are cut out of the mold differently.
This conversation would be infinitly more interesting if you brought in a bunch of English scholars to debate all the techno-geek denizens of/.
Video isn't going to be affected. The calculations that put it into affect are done by the CPUs, but the CPU NEVER talks directly to the video card or the disk drive. The RAM, well, if you access it once, it's gonna be in cache, so there was a previous poster that mentioned the only time this would affect anything would be absolutely simultaneous access of the same region in RAM. That is most likely to happen with the same task or process, and the OS gives priority to the last CPU the task or process ran on (check linux sched.c for a similar implementation). Your situation, that was mod'ed +5 is likely to occur about once in a computer's lifetime....
Just because one guy posted an argument and used what facts he felt backed his claims, doesn't nearly support your statement. I think the only thing that EVER settles any of the damn benchmark arguments is real-world, side-by-side testing of applications people use every day.
It's long been known almost all types of benchmarks can be skewed, and cross-platform benching is a completely subjective science. This fuss is ridiculous. Let's wait until someone gets their hands on a box, and lets us know what it really is like.
Last season the Giants hit 72 home runs at home but 126 away, opponents hit 42 at Pacbell and 74 at their home ballpark.
The Giants have the Rockies in their division. Everyone hits more home runs when they play the Rockies in Denver for 20 games a season.
that statement alone shows how little you know, PacBell is a pitchers park. While Bonds can drive it into the water there have been only 35 or so splash hits in the 3 years that PacBell has been open, more than half of them hit by Barry Bonds.
Well, that statement started off utterly unproductive, but we'll disregard and examine:
While PacBell Park is not an extreme hitters park like say, we could find in Denver, it has some noteable advantages to hitters. Your use of Bonds' home run hits to McCovey Cove is erroneous. That is RIGHT FIELD, and has a higher wall. But, as far as hitting stats go:
Bonds sleeping in his Estate:.373/.587/.843. Bonds living in Motels:.327/.548/.755.
While it does show a noticable decline in SF batting, you can't just compare one season to another: look at the Mariners' statistics last year in their new park, compared to the year before, compared to this year. They are up down up. No scientific backing there.
Well, I'm in full support of robots replacing them.
Do you have any idea how long it takes them to get to the big leagues? They work YEARS in the lowly minors, starting out in summer A-league which doesn't even have a full season. They travel, making as little as $20,000 to start, all over the place. It's not an easy job, and can take more than 10 years to reach the majors. It's not like they start out at $100,000 and sit in a cubicle all day looking at their college diplomas, surfing the web, looing up porn, and thinking about going home to their families. They travel all season, eat shitty food, umpire shitty games, and take a lot of shit from fans, players, and managers.
Slashdot Mirror
What the heck are you talking about? <-- Note the pretty pie chart.
You're ridiculous. The chart you started this thread with is GLOBAL market share. The blurb clearly delineates US-based market share preference for the iPhone, and given AT&T is a US-based carrier, the share of Symbian OS globally is a silly thing to compare against. Note this chunk:
"Considering Apple's gadget is currently the most popular handset in the U.S., its exclusive carrier's inability/unwillingness to support the device in the country's largest market is pretty huge news. If this proves true, I'd expect curtains for AT&T's exclusivity deal when it comes up for renewal.""
OK, here's the US-based share: http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2009/10/28/rim-and-apple-top-u-s-smartphone-market-share/
Given this, RIM is actually the favorite. I did no digging into the source of the data, but it appeared in numerous places and seemed to be well reviewed. It does not include Droid as it was published in late October 2009.
It also proves wrong the 1-2% commenter. iPhone is quite popular in US, but RIM still holds the edge.
So when was "chips-n-dips?" Because your user ID shows you were maybe 132,000 people away from being an "early adopter."
Your argument is out of context. You can not compare intentionally malicious methods, like worms, with an intentionally educational or informational which is certainly not a malignant one. In this case, the proper method to do what MOAB is doing is to actually work with the developers directly, or Apple regarding OS issues. They can *also* post them to their site, but to just throw them up there as if they were gotchas....its publicity whoring.
Your argument boils down to bad OS karma. That's pretty weak. Apple doesn't cover up the bugs, they go and fix them quickly and accurately. Apple is worrying about the bottom line more than the customer? Have you ever heard of Microsoft?
And how do you figure OS X is a gaping security hole? Have you even paused for a moment to compare the issues that come out regularly for all OS? This is nothing compared to Windows's issues.
Incorrect. The newer, especially 5G, iPod spec states you can do anything between 12 and 30 VDC.
The reason for locking into the iPod is because the airlines will be buying equipment from the in-flight entertainment vendor that will include software to seamlessly interface with the iPod, ie, loading all the information of what you have on the iPod. They will authenticate and have access to iPod audio and video through the 30-pin connector on the bottom. The in-flight software will have a nice iPod-ish interface to access your device while your device sits in a cradle in the seatback in front of you.
Thats why it won't be universal, as you would have no way of knowing how to interface the UI in front of you with whatever device, format, size, filesystem, you had brought on board.
It would be theoretically possible to charge a laptop, very slowly, from this 30-pin header if you rolled your own interposer cable to translate the power over, but it won't output enough current to power your backlight at anything below very dim. If you were playing games of video, it wouldn't have a net charge from that cable.
I took the test in Pascal about 6 years ago. I don't really understand why they moved it to Java. It seems to me, at that age, the fundamentals of programming basics are fairly important. I almost wish it would stay at C or Pascal for a while. While Java is nice and all (lots of creature comfort built in), it seems like moving backward from Java to something less comfortable (low-level C coding in the Linux kernel perhaps) is counter-intuitive. When you have the basics, extending to Java seems easy. Vice versa doesn't seem a pretty picture....
The idea behind the iMac is to fill in the middle niche in their product line. The Firewire 800 and all the fancier jazz, comes on the higher-end models (G5, Powerbook). The iBook and iMac are in the middle, and you can still pick up OS 9 compat. G4s and the eMac at the low end. So the idea is to appeal to people who probably will be completely happy with Firewire 400. If you're doing something that really needs 800, they want you in the G5 line or Powerbook.
It might sound crazy, but that's how they operate. Apple isn't just selling the hardware though. They tend to cut fewer corners in their hardware designs, and they are aware their hardware is more expensive. They are selling the OS, the reliability, and the longetivity.
I have two windows boxes, a linux, a BSD, and six Macs. I use OS X daily, but I can tell you all my old Macs are still in service, and going strong. I cant say that about my older Windows machines (linux has this sort of survivability though). Apple has an interesting market strategy, but I don't think that the computers are dead in 3-4 years. It's a facinating thing to watch.
Nope, iTunes was basically a revamped version of Casady & Greene's Sound Jam MP3 player. Apple acquired the SoundJam code to create iTunes, and Jeff Robbin, who created SoundJam, works (or worked) for Apple.
Check here for a little more info.
I can't imagine 600 Dell boxes costing 38 million, so I'm under the impression that planning, design, construction, maintenance, etc. add to the price of the servers significantly.
I think a big part of the "cost" factor is also in power consumption, not to discount how much it costs to contract Cray engineers. The G3/G4/G5 processors all use less power than an Intel/AMD/etc. alternative. When you're powering 600+ boxes, and using gobs of processing power, 24/7, 365, you have to consider how much it will cost to keep it all running for a few years. Schools consider this (businesses don't, typically) because everything needs to fit into the operating budget, dictated by the tuition cost plus the endowment.
I've always had good luck with the combo updaters. They are larger in size, but seem to reduce any chance of a hiccup.
7 .2 0030922.PkN45/2Z/MacOSXUpdateCombo10.2.8.dmg
http://download.info.apple.com/Mac_OS_X/061-067
Should point you to the 92 or so MB file...if you have the bandwidth...
well a quick look now shows that Intel have since then continued ramping up the old processors and these G5's aren't actually the fastest machines now you can actually buy them
A quick look where? These OS topics quickly desolve into unsubstantiated ramblings, so please post links not opinions...
No, it's not too complicated. The whole point of his article (and he mentions the low cost of Linux), is that the Macs take far less HUMAN overhead. Last I checked, even $1000 more for a Mac is nothing compared to what you pay for an IT professional ($50,000 +?). Im not saying it's a one-to-one savings, but when you throw in all the human costs, it starts to go up. Macs use less power, and that is multiplicative with the number of machines you have. More employees (IT professionals) have salary, benefits, retirements, infrastructure for payroll, HR, and on and on. He makes a valid point. I'd definitely like to see my entire school-wide infrastructure go Mac. I think it'd make it a whole lot more efficient.
The campus has about 30-40% Macs in labs and offices. The rest is pretty much windows, with some Sun thrown in the mix for the CS dept. Last I worked for them, they had one Mac person for all their needs, and about 10 Windows people. Im not exagerrating. 10:1. That's a huge difference in my book.
I really don't simpathize with the older iPod owners. It was the functionality offered at the time of purchase. If you are really itching for a the functionality, you have a couple options...
1) When the new 30GB came out, I sold my 20GB touch-wheel for almost $225. That made the 30GB 'upgrade' almost nothing. A lot of people with pay $200 for a 20GB MP3 player that is still better than all the competition, and acts like a tiny Firewire disk.
2) Complain, sign petitions, and try to get Apple to change policy.
3) Be content in the fact that you still have a 20GB MP3 player that is really cool, and sounds good. It is still better than what the other companies are offering currently, and you'll get many more years of life from it.
4) Shell out the cash and give the used 20GB iPod as a gift to a friend/relative.
Oh come on. We'll hand you a medal for your extensive debate skills, and then we'll get back on target. Thanks for handing me zero points, that's nice of you and all...
My point was past that...it dealt with a history of poor policy choices in the middle-east. It has nothing to do with revisionist history. It has everything to do with signs that point to further mistakes in dealing with a particular part of the world, and the futures market on middle-east politics and terrorism has ever indication that we still don't get it...
Oh, and congratulations on your 8 years of debate in high school and college...
Revisionist history? You've been following far too much American propoganda, and Fox News. I also didn't say anything was Isreal's fault, I said that we should examine our own responsibility when we call people terrorists? Those arab-israeli's you're referring to are very few in number compared to the Israeli population, and the land in question was occupied by Israel after the mandate that created Israel was set in action. In the occupied territories, there are less than 100,000 Israelis living amongst millions of palestinians. Your arguement is pure propaganda. Revisionist history is also pure bull-shit. That's a catch-phrase offered by neo-conservatives to put spin on criticism of past issues.
Your "six-nation" anti-israel thing is funny too. Who armed some of those countries? What about when Rumsfeld was shaking hands with Sadaam back when we wanted them to fight Iran, after we helped force the Iranian government out in the first place? This isn't revisionism, this is examining the facts and owning up to failed middle-east policy that we need to understand in order to set it straight. I'm saying that in the same way this "betting" on terrorism and political upheavel in the middle-east is poor policy, our past policy is equally as bad, and we need to change our tack when attempting to intervene.
Incidently, how did the 400,000 arabs who fled Israel at the behest of the Arab states end up being 3.6 billion in 50 years? Also, what happens to the 1+ million Jews who were thrown out of Arab states following the creation of Israel?
No one said 3.6 Billion. That's more than the world's population total. If you were thinking 3.6 million, that may be acurate, and the reason for that is the Isreali government. They will grant anyone citizenship if they can prove remote ties to Judaism.
As for the reason they left? No, the Arab states did not tell them to leave all together. Point is, 60 years ago, there was no Isreal. I have no issues with Jews, Arabs, or any other religious or ethnic group. My point is that the issues in the middle-east stem strongly from our arrogant view that a bunch of western states could transplant a million people on top of another culture, and it would just "work out."
The previous poster commented on how much we spend compared to other continents, well, Im not arguing that, but I wasn't talking about aid and relief to other countries. You have to understand a lot of that spending ends up working through the WTO, and there are ups and downs to that capitalist venture. What I'm saying is that our policies around the world are neither benevolent, nor understanding. We have to understand that other cultures value different values, and we must respect their right to live their lives. Case in point: France disagrees on our preemptive war, so now all us Americans boycott, bash, and badmouth France. Why? Because they disagree with us. I missed the point in time when God granted the US the "You're always right, no matter what anyone else says" card. What if we're wrong?
The reason why this is sick is because next time you read that some coward terrorist decided to blow himself up on a Tel Aviv bus, killing him/herself and 15 schoolchildren
So you're saying when we kicked those "terrorists" out of their houses and told them new people were living there, they have no right to fight back? If I kicked you out of your house, told you to go somewhere else, and I was gonna kick back on your couch and watch your plasma screen, you wouldn't be at all angry? And then when you went to the police, they said "tough shit," patted you on the back and told you to go work for me to make a few lousy bucks and live in squalor, then you were happy? So, you would NEVER think about hurting me, watching you plasma screen and swimming in your pool? You would actually just let me be and go live in a shitty, crumbling apartment?
Who are the terrorists? Has it ever occured to our government (US) that spending money on fixing the reasons why anit-american/western sentiments are fueling terrorism, and not to throw technology and legislation at this. This is a sick idea, and I hope the American public has a fire-sale in 2004, cleaning the senate and house out, kicking the Pres. out, and send a big "We're sorry" sign to the rest of the world...
I havent used the iTunes Music Store at all, but I think it seems to be FAR superior to this BuyMusic.com implementation. I saw a demo at one of the Apple Stores, and you can deauthorize, and re-authorize any computer. It makes it pretty easy, I'd imagine, to reinstall the entire OS and software, and just pick right up with your purchased music. Has anyone used both services that could provide a head-to-head comparison?
So after it was mentioned in the intro to the story, I looked at this BuyMusic.com, and read their terms of sale....man, this is a shitty music service...
Who cares about the freaking security, did anyone read the TERMS OF SALE AGREEMENT?
Check this out:
Content Use Rules. All downloaded music, images, video, artwork, text, software and other copyrightable materials ("Content") are sublicensed to End Users and not sold, notwithstanding use of the terms "sell," "purchase," "order," or "buy" on the Site or this Agreement.
Your Digital Download sublicense is nonexclusive, nontransferable, nonsublicenseable, limited and for use only within the United States. End users may play the Digital Downloads an unlimited number of times on the same registered personal computer to which the Digital Download is originally downloaded.
So are you saying I don't actually own what I'm "buying" on their site?
How can you unlicense your computer too? So if I get a new machine, I lose all my songs!? I couldn't find any mention of switching "primary computers" so that I can keep my music when I upgrade my machine. What about the next time I have to install a fresh version of XP over my current install? Has anyone checked out this service?
This article sucks. Misuse of ANY search engine, no matter the type, subject, content, or algorithm will lead to poor results. Who searches for gardening techniques using just the search term "flowers." Of course you won't find shit.
If you used, oh, maybe: flowers gardening tulips garden -buy
You would come out head and shoulders above what they claim are "google holes." Now I know Google has some weaknesses, and it's bad to really only have one search engine to turn to, but you have to RTFM and look at the search tips on ways to use a search engine. This article is weak, and filled with FUD. A real examination of the algorithm with a robust set of search terms would have been better...
I would assume that lower power FM radio stations would have lower overhead costs (power being one of them). This could allow for a subculture of small radio stations similar to public-access cult-followed TV shows.
Media reform, here we come!
Asking a bunch of technology-aware, most likely above average on the educational scale, daily-computer using "geeks" why no one understands our jargon, is like the guy who always yells at me for not doing my own taxes. I'm not freaking interested in my own taxes, and it's not worth my personal time, but it's worth about $75 for my accountant-friend to do 'em for me. Why doesn't everyone understand all the physics jargon?!?!? It governs our every movement....
/.
Well, some people are cut out for different things. A fellow graduate student in the English department can talk circles around me about certain authors, but we study different things and we understand each other's spoutings to a very small extent. It's not a crime to not know these things, so quit the "Ignorance won't ever be illegal" garbage. You can't know everything. Some people are cut out of the mold differently.
This conversation would be infinitly more interesting if you brought in a bunch of English scholars to debate all the techno-geek denizens of
Video isn't going to be affected. The calculations that put it into affect are done by the CPUs, but the CPU NEVER talks directly to the video card or the disk drive. The RAM, well, if you access it once, it's gonna be in cache, so there was a previous poster that mentioned the only time this would affect anything would be absolutely simultaneous access of the same region in RAM. That is most likely to happen with the same task or process, and the OS gives priority to the last CPU the task or process ran on (check linux sched.c for a similar implementation). Your situation, that was mod'ed +5 is likely to occur about once in a computer's lifetime....
Apple has so THOROUGHLY cheated
Just because one guy posted an argument and used what facts he felt backed his claims, doesn't nearly support your statement. I think the only thing that EVER settles any of the damn benchmark arguments is real-world, side-by-side testing of applications people use every day.
It's long been known almost all types of benchmarks can be skewed, and cross-platform benching is a completely subjective science. This fuss is ridiculous. Let's wait until someone gets their hands on a box, and lets us know what it really is like.
Last season the Giants hit 72 home runs at home but 126 away, opponents hit 42 at Pacbell and 74 at their home ballpark.
.373/.587/.843. .327/.548/.755.
The Giants have the Rockies in their division. Everyone hits more home runs when they play the Rockies in Denver for 20 games a season.
that statement alone shows how little you know, PacBell is a pitchers park. While Bonds can drive it into the water there have been only 35 or so splash hits in the 3 years that PacBell has been open, more than half of them hit by Barry Bonds.
Well, that statement started off utterly unproductive, but we'll disregard and examine:
While PacBell Park is not an extreme hitters park like say, we could find in Denver, it has some noteable advantages to hitters. Your use of Bonds' home run hits to McCovey Cove is erroneous. That is RIGHT FIELD, and has a higher wall. But, as far as hitting stats go:
Bonds sleeping in his Estate:
Bonds living in Motels:
Stats can be found here
While it does show a noticable decline in SF batting, you can't just compare one season to another: look at the Mariners' statistics last year in their new park, compared to the year before, compared to this year. They are up down up. No scientific backing there.
I rest my case.
Well, I'm in full support of robots replacing them.
Do you have any idea how long it takes them to get to the big leagues? They work YEARS in the lowly minors, starting out in summer A-league which doesn't even have a full season. They travel, making as little as $20,000 to start, all over the place. It's not an easy job, and can take more than 10 years to reach the majors. It's not like they start out at $100,000 and sit in a cubicle all day looking at their college diplomas, surfing the web, looing up porn, and thinking about going home to their families. They travel all season, eat shitty food, umpire shitty games, and take a lot of shit from fans, players, and managers.
Give 'em what they deserve.