Yes, there's a small minority of Slashdot readers and other super-nerds, but the truth is that there's an increasing percentage of computer owners with CD-R drives, blank disks, and cheap-o software that lets them copy songs.
That's great, but most OEM headunits are crap. I've listened to many of them and you can connect great speakers and a great amp to it, but the headunit can be crap. So it's a trade-off: good sound quality or system integration?
I totally understand where you're coming from. I didn't want to give up the headunit in my BMW because it looks right there and most headunits are gawdy and look awful in there. Turns out the BMW Harmon Kardon decks are actually pretty good as far as sound quality goes, even when amplified.
Excellent if you're a newbie and don't know much about car audio. They make very good recommendations and can tell you a whole lot. But a good audio shop will know way more about installation and can tell you how to make things fit.
Most audio chains will tell you what can fit with minimal changes to the car. If they have a full woodshop and/or a welder, they can make almost anything fit in your car. I'm not talking about extreme installations, either. If you want the speakers that sound better to you, but the magnets don't clear, they can build rings for you out of MDF. The chain stores that install stuff for you only use plastic pre-fabbed rings that sorta fit.
Good question... but I think as people get more familiar with computers, they have a better time understanding the pain of having an older, slower computer. Ten years ago, you tell people that 386s are the new requirement, they'll just give you a blank stare. You tell people today that P3s are the minimum requirement and the old Pentiums are too slow, they'll be able to relate to the fact that their old Pentium at home is too slow, as well.
Yes, that's true. But it doesn't mean that there shouldn't be an attempt to keep people honest -- that's why we have computer passwords, locks on doors, and even signatures. Technology can help to keep people honest.
Well, I caught the IMHO, but what you meant to say was: "I don't consider a Windows-based HTPC because I don't like Windows." Aside from your dislike of the OS, it's not as though it isn't a real, working HTPC.
Consider this statement:"IMHO, Sony DVD players aren't *real* DVD players." That statement isn't really true -- Sony DVD players are just as much as a DVD player as an other DVD player. The "IMHO" part doesn't mean anything. What I meant to say was "I don't consider a Sony DVD player one that I'd use because I don't like Sony products."
It's semantics, but I was trying to decide whether or not you had a technical reason for disqualifying Windows-based HTPCs, such as persistent lip-synching problems or some other sort of serious flaw that would prevent it from working.
IMHO, a Windows based PC is *not* a real HTPC...
Do you mean that a Windows based PC is not a real HTPC because of a technical qualification it doesn't meet or it's not one that you'd consider using because it runs Windows?
Re:The guy sounds like a world-class sleazeball.
on
Hacking Web Services
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
He's not relying upon obscurity, but it IS a tactic. You don't put a whiz-bang safe in your house that holds $1M and then advertise it in the newspaper. Your safe IS secure, right?
And the mass account creation anecdote was in humor...
The best browser is one that properly supports standards AND is the the most resilient to poor HTML. IE doesn't support all the standards properly, but it IS the most resilient browser.
Which would you rather have: a socket wrench crafted to perfectly fit 10mm nuts or one that can pull off 9mm-11mm nuts without stripping them? I'm going for the second one.
Until people write flawless HTML, IE is the better browser, IMHO. Microsoft isn't the only one that writes faulty HTML.
I agree. I'm also a big fan of cars and a big fan of BMWs in particular. I can understand how people could be daunted by the complexity of the i-Drive system. I know that I was confused at first, but I figured it out slowly and immediately understood how powerful it was.
People need to go in and try it out before making a judgement about it. Articles don't do the system justice. You have to try it out and understand the tactile feel of the system.
Two things that I haven't seen mentioned yet are that 1) there are two separate, distinct control zones and 2) important features come with duplicate controls.
BMWs have always been known for the driving experience. It becomes obvious when sitting down that all the controls required for driving are *right* there in front of you. No i-Drive logic to shift gears and such. They're all centered at or near the steering wheel. The comfort controls are all off the right, in the middle console. The New 7 brochure highlights how these two distinct zones are separated and it really makes a lot of sense.
Important, quicky required features, such as basic stereo controls and climate control, are plainly laid out on the dash on their own, so you don't need to stumble to find them when you first buy the car and friends/valets can still use the car. Before criticizing the new 7's system, check out the dashboard of the latest offerings from Mercedes-Benz. You get a cluttered layout of many buttons, often similarly sized: C32 AMG C-Class W203.
It can be confusing, but BMW has always been about the driver. While there has been a lot of criticizm lately about the looks of the new 7, it's still a driver's car. It handles, accelerates, and brakes just like a BMW should.
I agree. It's a nice application and looks great -- probably of real use to some people. But a MS Word competitor? It's not ready for the Big League yet. I'll wait for 2.0 on this one.
Many cars, including some current Mercedes Benzes, detect the car being towed, notifies MB Customer Service, which in turn calls you. Leave your cell phone number with them in advance, and they'll reach you by cell phone, telling you that your car is either being stolen or towed.
Dreamcast, Playstation, Playstation 2, and X-Box are ALL consoles that are sold at a loss. The cost of the machine is subsidized to bring the cost down and the money is made back up through volume sales of licensed games. Simple as that.
And by your own argument, PS3 will be better anyway given that it has how much time after the X-Box is out to improve on its product? The truth is that it doesn't matter that it had x months to improve on its product over the competition. If it doesn't have the features that consumers want, it won't sell. I don't stand there thinking "Well, gee, this TV built in 1986 was a GREAT TV at the time. Sony had a full 16 years to come up with a great Super Wega!" The argument doesn't fly.
You hit the nail on the head. Microsoft's.NET enterprise platform is a great idea and it really does introduce some great paradigms in programming. But you think that Open Source groups could have pulled off something so massive and sweeping? Not a chance. Microsoft has been planning the roots of.NET for years now and within 18 months, they've prepped the public and delivered. Getting all kinds of groups to coordinate an effort like this would have been impossible. This is the weakness of de-centralized development.
It doesn't need a the browser to work. It needs it for the interface. Just like cron will work as cron if you want it to, but if you slap a pretty interface around it, you're going to need an appropriate window manager to do so. The advantage is that you create an easy system to program for that can be feature-rich with little additional programming. The down side is that you've created a strong dependency, which explains why removing IE from Windows causes problems.
It's not that they can't. It's that they chose not to as an engineering approach and now they're stuck with it. Sure they can start all over again, but that's throwing away the product.
That's similar to saying that *nix can create an operating system without a GUI... why can't Microsoft? It's not that it can't, but it chose not to. And to do it now would be catastrophic.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, there's a small minority of Slashdot readers and other super-nerds, but the truth is that there's an increasing percentage of computer owners with CD-R drives, blank disks, and cheap-o software that lets them copy songs.
Moby spoke out against Eminem's lyrics last year, saying that they're irresponsible.
http://www.vh1.com/news/stories/1453610.jhtml
What does the Post Office say your city is when you enter in the ZIP Code?
That's great, but most OEM headunits are crap. I've listened to many of them and you can connect great speakers and a great amp to it, but the headunit can be crap. So it's a trade-off: good sound quality or system integration?
I totally understand where you're coming from. I didn't want to give up the headunit in my BMW because it looks right there and most headunits are gawdy and look awful in there. Turns out the BMW Harmon Kardon decks are actually pretty good as far as sound quality goes, even when amplified.
Excellent if you're a newbie and don't know much about car audio. They make very good recommendations and can tell you a whole lot. But a good audio shop will know way more about installation and can tell you how to make things fit. Most audio chains will tell you what can fit with minimal changes to the car. If they have a full woodshop and/or a welder, they can make almost anything fit in your car. I'm not talking about extreme installations, either. If you want the speakers that sound better to you, but the magnets don't clear, they can build rings for you out of MDF. The chain stores that install stuff for you only use plastic pre-fabbed rings that sorta fit.
Yes, it does. But it's not sufficient.
Good question ... but I think as people get more familiar with computers, they have a better time understanding the pain of having an older, slower computer. Ten years ago, you tell people that 386s are the new requirement, they'll just give you a blank stare. You tell people today that P3s are the minimum requirement and the old Pentiums are too slow, they'll be able to relate to the fact that their old Pentium at home is too slow, as well.
You should throw out your keycards and give me your PIN numbers, then.
That's similar to displaying a JPEG on your screen an taking a picture of it with your digital camera instead of copying the file.
Yes, that's true. But it doesn't mean that there shouldn't be an attempt to keep people honest -- that's why we have computer passwords, locks on doors, and even signatures. Technology can help to keep people honest.
Well, I caught the IMHO, but what you meant to say was: "I don't consider a Windows-based HTPC because I don't like Windows." Aside from your dislike of the OS, it's not as though it isn't a real, working HTPC.
Consider this statement:"IMHO, Sony DVD players aren't *real* DVD players." That statement isn't really true -- Sony DVD players are just as much as a DVD player as an other DVD player. The "IMHO" part doesn't mean anything. What I meant to say was "I don't consider a Sony DVD player one that I'd use because I don't like Sony products." It's semantics, but I was trying to decide whether or not you had a technical reason for disqualifying Windows-based HTPCs, such as persistent lip-synching problems or some other sort of serious flaw that would prevent it from working.
IMHO, a Windows based PC is *not* a real HTPC ...
Do you mean that a Windows based PC is not a real HTPC because of a technical qualification it doesn't meet or it's not one that you'd consider using because it runs Windows?
He's not relying upon obscurity, but it IS a tactic. You don't put a whiz-bang safe in your house that holds $1M and then advertise it in the newspaper. Your safe IS secure, right? And the mass account creation anecdote was in humor ...
Ask for a refund! Oh, wait ...
The best browser is one that properly supports standards AND is the the most resilient to poor HTML. IE doesn't support all the standards properly, but it IS the most resilient browser.
Which would you rather have: a socket wrench crafted to perfectly fit 10mm nuts or one that can pull off 9mm-11mm nuts without stripping them? I'm going for the second one.
Until people write flawless HTML, IE is the better browser, IMHO. Microsoft isn't the only one that writes faulty HTML.
No kidding ... some people can't think outside of their nerdbox.
I agree. I'm also a big fan of cars and a big fan of BMWs in particular. I can understand how people could be daunted by the complexity of the i-Drive system. I know that I was confused at first, but I figured it out slowly and immediately understood how powerful it was.
People need to go in and try it out before making a judgement about it. Articles don't do the system justice. You have to try it out and understand the tactile feel of the system.
Two things that I haven't seen mentioned yet are that 1) there are two separate, distinct control zones and 2) important features come with duplicate controls.
BMWs have always been known for the driving experience. It becomes obvious when sitting down that all the controls required for driving are *right* there in front of you. No i-Drive logic to shift gears and such. They're all centered at or near the steering wheel. The comfort controls are all off the right, in the middle console. The New 7 brochure highlights how these two distinct zones are separated and it really makes a lot of sense.
Important, quicky required features, such as basic stereo controls and climate control, are plainly laid out on the dash on their own, so you don't need to stumble to find them when you first buy the car and friends/valets can still use the car. Before criticizing the new 7's system, check out the dashboard of the latest offerings from Mercedes-Benz. You get a cluttered layout of many buttons, often similarly sized: C32 AMG C-Class W203.
It can be confusing, but BMW has always been about the driver. While there has been a lot of criticizm lately about the looks of the new 7, it's still a driver's car. It handles, accelerates, and brakes just like a BMW should.
Ha ha ... I dare you to try!
I agree. It's a nice application and looks great -- probably of real use to some people. But a MS Word competitor? It's not ready for the Big League yet. I'll wait for 2.0 on this one.
Many cars, including some current Mercedes Benzes, detect the car being towed, notifies MB Customer Service, which in turn calls you. Leave your cell phone number with them in advance, and they'll reach you by cell phone, telling you that your car is either being stolen or towed.
Dreamcast, Playstation, Playstation 2, and X-Box are ALL consoles that are sold at a loss. The cost of the machine is subsidized to bring the cost down and the money is made back up through volume sales of licensed games. Simple as that. And by your own argument, PS3 will be better anyway given that it has how much time after the X-Box is out to improve on its product? The truth is that it doesn't matter that it had x months to improve on its product over the competition. If it doesn't have the features that consumers want, it won't sell. I don't stand there thinking "Well, gee, this TV built in 1986 was a GREAT TV at the time. Sony had a full 16 years to come up with a great Super Wega!" The argument doesn't fly.
Good story; thanks for telling it.
You hit the nail on the head. Microsoft's .NET enterprise platform is a great idea and it really does introduce some great paradigms in programming. But you think that Open Source groups could have pulled off something so massive and sweeping? Not a chance. Microsoft has been planning the roots of .NET for years now and within 18 months, they've prepped the public and delivered. Getting all kinds of groups to coordinate an effort like this would have been impossible. This is the weakness of de-centralized development.
It doesn't need a the browser to work. It needs it for the interface. Just like cron will work as cron if you want it to, but if you slap a pretty interface around it, you're going to need an appropriate window manager to do so. The advantage is that you create an easy system to program for that can be feature-rich with little additional programming. The down side is that you've created a strong dependency, which explains why removing IE from Windows causes problems.
It's not that they can't. It's that they chose not to as an engineering approach and now they're stuck with it. Sure they can start all over again, but that's throwing away the product. That's similar to saying that *nix can create an operating system without a GUI ... why can't Microsoft? It's not that it can't, but it chose not to. And to do it now would be catastrophic.