For $1 a track I can see $100 being wasted REALLY quick.
and without this service, that same $100 will buy you 7 cd's (at 14.29 per cd)
everyone who thinks they'll be able to get their top 100 favorite tracks by buying only 7 cd's please raise your hands... anyone... anyone... bueller...
After reading through that report for the third time, I think I have an interesting point to make - but I'll wait for slashdot to dupe the story a fourth time before I post it...
but I think "idiot" is far too harsh. If he is intellectually honest, he will redo his benchmarks applying this recent discovery
Yes, idiot might be too harsh, but from what I've heard of him and his demeanor towards macs, I seriously doubt he will redo the benchmarks using the full power of a dual processor mac. I certainly hope he proves me wrong, for the sake of his "intellectual honesty".
Take for instance the entire tone of the article, which can be summed up by the title he used "mac slaughtered again." Now ask why he never once questioned the performance of the Mac, and why it performed as such? He never even asks if the fault of the performance lies with Apple (hardware) or Adobe (software). He wants to lead you believe it is the Mac hardware that falls short, when the software is as much or more to blame for the performance. Had the software he was using been threaded properly (and Adobe knows how to do this, see Photoshop) to take advantage of the multi-processors, which this "hack" allows you to do, his precious new Dell with it's hyperthreading might not have fared so well.
Nonetheless, when we get right down to brass tacks, my only point (which I admit I overdid in using the term idiot) is that Mr White has a bias, and his tests were meant solely to reinforce that bias, just as Photoshop bakeoffs are meant to reinforce a pro-mac bias.
Glad you got the humor of my post. Do I actually believe that poster was Charlie? no. Do I believe a 1.25 GHz G4 is 68% slower than a 3.04 GHz P4? no. But I can spot the idiots on both sides of the fence, and Mr. White is one of them, if only because he believed the results of his tests enough to publish them, and make a fool of himself, the same way some mac users will point to Photoshop bakeoffs as proof that a 1 GHz G4 is 2x faster than a 2.5 GHz P4.
So your elaborately compiled list of result ratios just reinforces White's claims
don't you mean: "So your elaborately compiled list of result ratios just reinforces my claims"
nice try at saving face, Mr. White, but you need a refresher course in the math subject area. I must admit I am amused to think of all the PC apologists who inisted that After Effects, and therefore your article's testing, was using both processors on that dual G4.
My simplification of Charlie White's article: A single 1.25 GHz G4 is 68% slower than a 3.04 GHz P4. (is that something to tout now, really?)
you really miss the ability to operate the remote by touch only
Not me. I still operate by touch and always will. I tried that old sucky Sony touchpad remote back in '97 or '98. What a piece of crap - you have to look down anytime you want to push a button to make sure you actually hit the right "button". I returned it and bought the remote I still use today. The one remote to rule all other remotes: a Marantz RC2000 MkII, but I guess it's not considered a high end remote anymore... what ever, 5 years later and I've never batted an eye at another universal remote.
IMHO, anyone who's interested in a good universal remote should give this one a try. (that it's also cheaper than either of the two reviewed remotes is an added bonus)
The reason command line tools are very useful is for cron jobs. I dont know how many times on a windows machine I wish that there was an command line tool to do something.
Here's a free clue, kid: just because you don't know how to do it, doesn't mean it can't be done. Like the other poster said, at/?. And if you're really into command lines, look up Windows Scripting Host on MSDN
Here's a free clue, kid: someone posts that command line tools are useful for in cron jobs, and that many times he wishes there was a "command line" tool to do something. (not schedule something)
60 people post a reply to him on slashdot to inform him of the command "at" which allows a windows machine to schedule things.
What do you do? what.. DO.. you... DO?
Heck, just add a 61st post which tries to put the original poster in his place by answering a question he didn't even ask! It's the slashdot way!
Not that those other 60 posters aren't just as clueless... but you all should learn that if you don't understand someone's post... you should just keep your trap shut.
Now that more and more channels are introducing a 'plus one hour' version, I.E. see the program that was on at 6 PM, at 7 PM, and now that there are so many repeats on TV, I think the need to record TV is quickly decreasing.
you're still watching on someone else's schedule, and you're spending an hour watching 40 minutes of programming....
With no films being broadcast, it neatly solves the problem of home recording!
you think no one records anything but movies off tv? I rarely record movies - I prefer to watch a dvd, or go to the theater...
I can find quite a bit of programming that I'm interested in watching, as long as I can watch it when I want. The few things I still watch live are news (rarely) and sporting events.
Tivo offers a similar deal for $250, which gives you the service for the lifetime of your Tivo. So it's really just that Tivo is giving you more payment options for the service.
Recently, just a few months after the release of the 4500, ReplayTV has changed their model to add a subscription option. The top of the line 320 hour ReplayTV 4500 was $1999. They reduced the price to $1749, with either a monthly fee or a $250 lifetime (of the unit) fee (all models were dropped by $250). Since then, they reduced prices on all their units again, bringing that price down to $1399 ($1299 w/a $100 rebate thru mid october), but I am still happy with my old 3030 (30 hour unit) for now.
Anyway, point is - both TiVo and ReplayTV seem to have the same options now, though I don't understand why anyone would go for monthly payments anyway... who needs another monthly bill?
I agree, and the wierd thing is, when I went into Software Update to have it check for these updates, it was off on both of the computers I just updated to 10.2. It was always on by default before with 'weekly' checking, and I didn't turn it off - so I might not have know until I saw news about it, or had I decided to check my software update at some point and realized it was disabled....
Oh, they're pumping out those old 1.25GHz G4 chips that won't be available to ship until 6-8 weeks from now - but mark your words, they're gonna get rid of them if it kills them!!!
(but at least you covered your ass - "the g5's are coming soon! or not!")
If MS and yahoo want to interoperate so badly, why don't they just work on interoperating with each other, and jabber, or any other IM server operation out there. If they just did this, and it was everyone vs AOL, I don't think it would take too long for AOL to make their client work with the existing 'standard' - if that standard worked (with MS involved I believe it would end up a rampant spam/virus playground, but that's beside the point.)
But really that's not the point to these companies. Interoperability doesn't mean jack to them or they'd already have it working among everyone except AOL. The real point is that they want access to the user base that AOL can provide - that is more important than interoperability to them.
The day I can log on to yahoo messenger and IM someone at user@msnmsgr, I will believe in interoperability - too bad everyone seems to think that this can't happen without AOL, because that means it'll be a cold day in hell before it all works.....
This game is the only reason I still have my old Apple IIc (well, besides karateka) - I really should just dl an image of it to play in an emulator, but then I'd be labeled a pirate ('Aaarrgh!') even though I own the original disks, packaging, and all.
A modern day ACS would rock - but would probably be commercially unsuccessful. One person does not a market make....
The obvoius solution to this is that cable and DSL providers need to stop trying to control how we use the bandwidth we pay for and just focus on how much bandwidth each user is allowed to use. Bandwidth caps are good, and anyone who un-caps their router/modem without notifiying their provider (so they can be billed appropriately) is stealing bandwidth they are not paying for. And monthly caps are not unreasonable as long as you only get knocked down to 56k or 33k for the remainder of the month - it would be unreasonable if you lost all service for the last week of the month.
Everyone of you who are outraged that you can't have a full T1 service for $40/mo are being outrageous. You expect all the others on your loop to subsidize your use? Grow up and get real. Bandwidth costs money, and if you aren't willing to pay for it - well, I'm not gonna shed a tear for you. You're stealing just like someone stealing HBO - and should be subject to prosecution just the same, if you get caught.
Basically, users need to stop expecting to get more than their money's worth, and providers need to stop worrying about what's done with the bandwidth.
...and I want to take photos/video without the anyone knowing. No, wait... I'm a photojournalist, and I don't want the police to know I'm taking pictures - yeah, that's the ticket!
Give some specific examples. From what I've heard, the opposite is true.
I don't know about Tivo, but with ReplayTV, you can set up a manual record with all the same options as a normal VCR - start time, end time, channel, record quality....
Not to mention a real 30 second skip button.;) Tivo reminds me of Microsoft in that respect - you know that when ReplayTV wins the lawsuit against them Tivo will just "innovate" the controversial features into it's product - nothing wagered, everything gained.... But as much as I wish they'd grow some balls, I don't think they'll come off that fence until ReplayTV's made it safe for them.
-how the FUCK are you going to play metroid in first-person?! --Probably much the same way you play Sonic, Mario, and Zelda in 3d.
first person != third person
The only first person game I have liked recently is GT3. I know I will give this one a chance (it is Nintendo after all), but if it plays like all the fps's I've ever played (Marathon 1-Infinity, Quake 1-3, Bond, Turok) I'm gonna be very disappointed. Mostly it comes down to this - fps's usually have minimal story, little character development (aside from 10 different guns), and end up only being fun when played online/mutliplayer in a frag-fest - which soon gets ruined by the cheaters...
So, I agree with the first post - I want to know how Nintendo is going to keep from 'Castlevania-ing' Metroid in the transition to 3D, especially first-person 3D. My expectations are that the GBA version of Metroid will be the better game. Hopefully Nintendo can surprise me....
Good luck compiling all that "linux code" on XP...jackass...
It's too bad some people don't have a sense of humor, can't laugh at themselves - I found the parent post to be sarcastically funny - it's obviously not a true story - and it's actually a pretty good troll....
Slashdot Mirror
For $1 a track I can see $100 being wasted REALLY quick.
and without this service, that same $100 will buy you 7 cd's (at 14.29 per cd)
everyone who thinks they'll be able to get their top 100 favorite tracks by buying only 7 cd's please raise your hands... anyone... anyone... bueller...
But, I'd never be interested in BUYING a song in a lossy format.
like, say, a cd? (or do you really think a cd is a lossless format?)
After reading through that report for the third time, I think I have an interesting point to make - but I'll wait for slashdot to dupe the story a fourth time before I post it...
but I think "idiot" is far too harsh. If he is intellectually honest, he will redo his benchmarks applying this recent discovery
Yes, idiot might be too harsh, but from what I've heard of him and his demeanor towards macs, I seriously doubt he will redo the benchmarks using the full power of a dual processor mac. I certainly hope he proves me wrong, for the sake of his "intellectual honesty".
Take for instance the entire tone of the article, which can be summed up by the title he used "mac slaughtered again." Now ask why he never once questioned the performance of the Mac, and why it performed as such? He never even asks if the fault of the performance lies with Apple (hardware) or Adobe (software). He wants to lead you believe it is the Mac hardware that falls short, when the software is as much or more to blame for the performance. Had the software he was using been threaded properly (and Adobe knows how to do this, see Photoshop) to take advantage of the multi-processors, which this "hack" allows you to do, his precious new Dell with it's hyperthreading might not have fared so well.
Nonetheless, when we get right down to brass tacks, my only point (which I admit I overdid in using the term idiot) is that Mr White has a bias, and his tests were meant solely to reinforce that bias, just as Photoshop bakeoffs are meant to reinforce a pro-mac bias.
Glad you got the humor of my post. Do I actually believe that poster was Charlie? no. Do I believe a 1.25 GHz G4 is 68% slower than a 3.04 GHz P4? no. But I can spot the idiots on both sides of the fence, and Mr. White is one of them, if only because he believed the results of his tests enough to publish them, and make a fool of himself, the same way some mac users will point to Photoshop bakeoffs as proof that a 1 GHz G4 is 2x faster than a 2.5 GHz P4.
So your elaborately compiled list of result ratios just reinforces White's claims
don't you mean: "So your elaborately compiled list of result ratios just reinforces my claims"
nice try at saving face, Mr. White, but you need a refresher course in the math subject area. I must admit I am amused to think of all the PC apologists who inisted that After Effects, and therefore your article's testing, was using both processors on that dual G4.
My simplification of Charlie White's article:
A single 1.25 GHz G4 is 68% slower than a 3.04 GHz P4. (is that something to tout now, really?)
I agree, but apparently this review was about flash, not function, otherwise they would have included the Marantz RC2000 MkII.
you really miss the ability to operate the remote by touch only
Not me. I still operate by touch and always will. I tried that old sucky Sony touchpad remote back in '97 or '98. What a piece of crap - you have to look down anytime you want to push a button to make sure you actually hit the right "button". I returned it and bought the remote I still use today. The one remote to rule all other remotes: a Marantz RC2000 MkII, but I guess it's not considered a high end remote anymore... what ever, 5 years later and I've never batted an eye at another universal remote.
IMHO, anyone who's interested in a good universal remote should give this one a try. (that it's also cheaper than either of the two reviewed remotes is an added bonus)
The reason command line tools are very useful is for cron jobs. I dont know how many times on a windows machine I wish that there was an command line tool to do something.
/?. And if you're really into command lines, look up Windows Scripting Host on MSDN
Here's a free clue, kid: just because you don't know how to do it, doesn't mean it can't be done. Like the other poster said, at
Here's a free clue, kid: someone posts that command line tools are useful for in cron jobs, and that many times he wishes there was a "command line" tool to do something. (not schedule something)
60 people post a reply to him on slashdot to inform him of the command "at" which allows a windows machine to schedule things.
What do you do? what.. DO.. you... DO?
Heck, just add a 61st post which tries to put the original poster in his place by answering a question he didn't even ask! It's the slashdot way!
Not that those other 60 posters aren't just as clueless... but you all should learn that if you don't understand someone's post... you should just keep your trap shut.
karma? who cares... flame away.
Now that more and more channels are introducing a 'plus one hour' version, I.E. see the program that was on at 6 PM, at 7 PM, and now that there are so many repeats on TV, I think the need to record TV is quickly decreasing.
you're still watching on someone else's schedule, and you're spending an hour watching 40 minutes of programming....
With no films being broadcast, it neatly solves the problem of home recording!
you think no one records anything but movies off tv? I rarely record movies - I prefer to watch a dvd, or go to the theater...
I can find quite a bit of programming that I'm interested in watching, as long as I can watch it when I want. The few things I still watch live are news (rarely) and sporting events.
Tivo offers a similar deal for $250, which gives you the service for the lifetime of your Tivo. So it's really just that Tivo is giving you more payment options for the service.
Recently, just a few months after the release of the 4500, ReplayTV has changed their model to add a subscription option. The top of the line 320 hour ReplayTV 4500 was $1999. They reduced the price to $1749, with either a monthly fee or a $250 lifetime (of the unit) fee (all models were dropped by $250). Since then, they reduced prices on all their units again, bringing that price down to $1399 ($1299 w/a $100 rebate thru mid october), but I am still happy with my old 3030 (30 hour unit) for now.
Anyway, point is - both TiVo and ReplayTV seem to have the same options now, though I don't understand why anyone would go for monthly payments anyway... who needs another monthly bill?
We don't have any FW drives :(
well, in the $150-$300 solution range, I think getting a FW drive would be a very good option...
I agree, and the wierd thing is, when I went into Software Update to have it check for these updates, it was off on both of the computers I just updated to 10.2. It was always on by default before with 'weekly' checking, and I didn't turn it off - so I might not have know until I saw news about it, or had I decided to check my software update at some point and realized it was disabled....
Oh, they're pumping out those old 1.25GHz G4 chips that won't be available to ship until 6-8 weeks from now - but mark your words, they're gonna get rid of them if it kills them!!!
(but at least you covered your ass - "the g5's are coming soon! or not!")
If MS and yahoo want to interoperate so badly, why don't they just work on interoperating with each other, and jabber, or any other IM server operation out there. If they just did this, and it was everyone vs AOL, I don't think it would take too long for AOL to make their client work with the existing 'standard' - if that standard worked (with MS involved I believe it would end up a rampant spam/virus playground, but that's beside the point.)
But really that's not the point to these companies. Interoperability doesn't mean jack to them or they'd already have it working among everyone except AOL. The real point is that they want access to the user base that AOL can provide - that is more important than interoperability to them.
The day I can log on to yahoo messenger and IM someone at user@msnmsgr, I will believe in interoperability - too bad everyone seems to think that this can't happen without AOL, because that means it'll be a cold day in hell before it all works.....
http://www.gengasw.com/ourgames.html for os x, but it is shareware, and don't know how well it works - i haven't tried it yet.
This game is the only reason I still have my old Apple IIc (well, besides karateka) - I really should just dl an image of it to play in an emulator, but then I'd be labeled a pirate ('Aaarrgh!') even though I own the original disks, packaging, and all.
A modern day ACS would rock - but would probably be commercially unsuccessful. One person does not a market make....
The obvoius solution to this is that cable and DSL providers need to stop trying to control how we use the bandwidth we pay for and just focus on how much bandwidth each user is allowed to use. Bandwidth caps are good, and anyone who un-caps their router/modem without notifiying their provider (so they can be billed appropriately) is stealing bandwidth they are not paying for. And monthly caps are not unreasonable as long as you only get knocked down to 56k or 33k for the remainder of the month - it would be unreasonable if you lost all service for the last week of the month.
Everyone of you who are outraged that you can't have a full T1 service for $40/mo are being outrageous. You expect all the others on your loop to subsidize your use? Grow up and get real. Bandwidth costs money, and if you aren't willing to pay for it - well, I'm not gonna shed a tear for you. You're stealing just like someone stealing HBO - and should be subject to prosecution just the same, if you get caught.
Basically, users need to stop expecting to get more than their money's worth, and providers need to stop worrying about what's done with the bandwidth.
...and I want to take photos/video without the anyone knowing. No, wait...
I'm a photojournalist, and I don't want the police to know I'm taking pictures - yeah, that's the ticket!
Give some specific examples. From what I've heard, the opposite is true.
;) Tivo reminds me of Microsoft in that respect - you know that when ReplayTV wins the lawsuit against them Tivo will just "innovate" the controversial features into it's product - nothing wagered, everything gained.... But as much as I wish they'd grow some balls, I don't think they'll come off that fence until ReplayTV's made it safe for them.
I don't know about Tivo, but with ReplayTV, you can set up a manual record with all the same options as a normal VCR - start time, end time, channel, record quality....
Not to mention a real 30 second skip button.
Is there any possibility the networks could try to sabotage PVRs by restricting access to their schedules?
That would truly be a brilliant thing for them to try....
Hey, what time is 24 on this week?
Dunno. Let's watch for a commercial for it.
If a network even thought about keeping their schedule a secret they'd probably lose a million viewers.
-how the FUCK are you going to play metroid in first-person?!
--Probably much the same way you play Sonic, Mario, and Zelda in 3d.
first person != third person
The only first person game I have liked recently is GT3. I know I will give this one a chance (it is Nintendo after all), but if it plays like all the fps's I've ever played (Marathon 1-Infinity, Quake 1-3, Bond, Turok) I'm gonna be very disappointed. Mostly it comes down to this - fps's usually have minimal story, little character development (aside from 10 different guns), and end up only being fun when played online/mutliplayer in a frag-fest - which soon gets ruined by the cheaters...
So, I agree with the first post - I want to know how Nintendo is going to keep from 'Castlevania-ing' Metroid in the transition to 3D, especially first-person 3D. My expectations are that the GBA version of Metroid will be the better game. Hopefully Nintendo can surprise me....
Good luck compiling all that "linux code" on XP...jackass...
It's too bad some people don't have a sense of humor, can't laugh at themselves - I found the parent post to be sarcastically funny - it's obviously not a true story - and it's actually a pretty good troll....
The X-Box is definitely losing money on each sale
Microsoft loses money on each Xbox sold.... therefore, they really aren't losing much money now, are they? (at least not in Japan or Europe)
Sony buys (into) Rare [the-lowdown.net]
you did notice the date on this story, right?