A lot of games, at the time they hit the shelves, are capable of much better looking graphics then what is possible on the "average" PC install-base.
This has been happening for years. The game developers want the games to look even better when the next generation of machines appears as to increase the appeal of playing/buying the game for longer. (Unless, of course, it's an EA sports game. Those hit the shelves twice a year.)
Apple screwed several manufacturers with their clone program. They allowed companies to clone the machines, and Apple sold them the OS. When Apple realized that the clone makers were making more powerful, more upgradable, and cheaper computers then any of the Macintoshes, they stopped allowing MacOS to be installed on the clones.
They started up a market and then crushed it. I'd have been pissed if I started a company to make these new clones with the blessing of Apple, only to have them punk out a year later!
Who knows the real reason Apple stopped the clone market. It seems to me that if they continued to allow MacOS installations on clones, they might have lost out on hardware sales but could have been real competition for Microsoft as an OS and Software developer. Or maybe not. But the whole clone/no clone chapter in Apple's history continues to make me believe that Apple cannot be trusted - and why I won't buy a Mac. Too much control over the platform.
No, but it won't be as easy. During the few years of the.com boom, you could say "Yea I have windows skills!" because you run it on your home PC, and get a 70K/yr job doing IT administration. Now these same people have work experience, while still having no real skills. Sure, they can read a manual and install some systems.. but actually being GOOD at it takes more then that.
I'm not saying this applies to everyone, there's a lot of great admins out there that got in because of the.com, but there's an overwhelming amount of ones that aren't great.
And to add to that, I believe that all the Windows IT professionals that continue to ignore Linux will end up on the you know what end of the stick.
The trend towards Linux systems has been steadily going up, never down, and there's no sign of slow down.
When Linux IT jobs begin to out-number Windows IT jobs, it could even bring Information Technology as a viable career choice, one which is not filled with underqualified people that got in during the.com era and won't leave.
Even the English version of their page is somewhat poorly translated, but it's pretty obvious they mean you can synchronize with Outlook, not that it INCLUDES outlook.
They also say there's viewers for office documents - don't confuse that with "Includes Microsoft Office."
I guess if it would be possible to port normal linux apps to it, it would be a great geak device. I'd love to be able to hack away on a linux "box" anywhere. Could run all my favorite linux console apps, and maybe even X stuff if it supported some sort of X interface.
But other then that, the Linux "Qt" PDA GUI has been used in Sharp PDA's and others, and provides most if not all (or more?) of what you'd find on a Windows CE based device.
>> Why should we build roads where there is little benefit to offset the costs? You're implying that people should subsidize rural development with no discernable benefit to themselves? Why?
Because it's the right thing to do! Maybe some people live on farms and grow crops to feed our fat asses - does that mean they shouldn't be have good roads and good schools? Because that's what would happen if it was privatized: there's no profit in giving these people proper utilities because it's not densly populated enough.
>> The only reason that you think schooling is "free" is because you don't directly see the costs
Who said I think it was free? Don't put words into my mouth, thanks. I actually said "I'm sure it wasn't cheap." Not sure how that implies that I think it was free?
>> Perhaps you don't quite understand capitalism. Greed and selfishness are the hallmarks of capitalism.
Although it often ends up being this way, I don't think the basis of capitalism is greed and selfeshness. I think it's free enterprise - the ability to create and bring a product or service to the market without government intervention. Just because a lot of companies are greedy sleezy companies doesn't mean that's how it all is or by definition capitalism.
>> Do you redistribute all of your disposable income to poor people?
All of it? No. But some of it, yes, it's called Taxes.
>> The question is - how to we allocate those resources? Should a small group of elite power-brokers in washington decide?
And you think things would be better in a completely privatized corporation based system of public services and government?
>> If you want to spend more than your daily usage of public utility, then you are free to do so. Just don't steal money from others who are not willing to do so.
I don't just pay into public services I don't use because I'm feeling nice. One day, I might use those services. Or my kids might, or my parents, or my friends.
And shit man, maybe I think the poor family down the road should be able to feed their family, and maybe I think the farmer out in the boondox should have a paved road and clean water to drink. Maybe I think we should all do a little bit to help out our fellow citizens and our taxes to a lot to help. If a few bucks a month out of my pocket is going to be able to do all that, then I say it's worth it.
I will say this again though, just because I don't think you're getting this: I don't think all our tax money is being used wisely. I think that a lot of things need to change. I think our current system works - we need to get rid of the abuse and corruption in our government to make things right. Privatizing things won't cure this either (see: Enron, Worldcom, etc..)
>> In fact, it is that simple. Look into capitalism sometime. Capital is never efficiently allocated by governments.
I believe that capitalism works (for the most part) in our country because it sits on top of the infrastructure provided by our public services.
>> But seriously, roads could have been built by private corporations and paid for by people that use them via tolls. Since roads are integral for business enterprise, there would be a very strong incentive for capital flow there in order to build them.
This isn't true, really. The same would happen with what we have in Internet access. Only the densely populated areas (where you can get more tolls) would get roads, and everyone else would get dirt.
>> Schools are the same way. A school would likely be more efficiently run by a private enterprise due to competitive forces. Therefore, it would be cheaper than government-run schools. If citizens value education, they will allocate capital for it.
I never said our government runs things properly, and there's a hell of a lot of room for improvement. But the truth is that the vast majority of kids can get a decent K-12 education in our country today. If it were a "pay as you go, only if you use it" program, it would be far too expensive to put your kids through 12 years of school. If it were privitized, we'd still have to have tax money pay for it..
>> The $5 that they have is theirs to do with as they wish. That's the essence of freedom.
No, this is the essence of greed and anarchy. Let the rich get richer and the poor stay where they are, right? Because that's what you do if you don't pay anything into public services unless you use them yourself. It's selfish.
>> When the government forcibly takes a chuck of that from you because "they know better" - it's the opposite of freedom.
I never said it was perfect, and I'll say again that there's a lot of room for improvement. Applying capitalizm to public works would be a disaster.
I like being in control of my workstation, but even as an IT engineer for the corporate network I submit to not being able to do so to the benefit of the companies ability to manage the computer environment effectively.
My guess is that this guys' engineering company is small beans if the engineers were able to raise enough stink to get a descision like that reversed.
At my company, we have over 5,000 Windows XP workstations; notebooks and desktops. A team of about 10 people manage the entire system.
With the help of Active Directory, some really neat software (Marimba) and some planning, you can manage thousands of Windows workstations with a minimal staff.
You lock down the machines (no admin logins) you manage the software versions and patches (centralized software distribution) and you don't allow users to install software on their own.
Denying admin logins alone stops 95% of all spyware.
40 workstations without any control WOULD be all an admin could handle, but when you deploy them correctly you can support over 10x that - just like any other system.
Scott Gordon [sgordon@vaco.com] RE: Inquiry about Dice Job Number ADMEM
Thanks very much for your inquiry. We've filled this position today with someone of 12+ total years of experience.
Good luck in your job search! ------------ My response to that: Alas, how is this possible? Active directory was first included with Windows 2000. The "2000" means the year, 2000. Being 2005 now, that means it's only been available for five years.
While I'm not trying to argue with you here, I thought I might let you know so you could fix the job description as it's inaccurate.
I consider myself very good at my trade, and I wouldn't apply for a job when the company can't get the job requirements correct - you know you're in for trouble when the boss apparently knows nothing about the technology; not even enough to realize 2000 means the year 2000. If you're a recruiting firm, you may attract more skilled people if you have an accurate description.
Fortunately I'm not looking for a job as I am already employed. Sometimes I look to see how the market is looking.
Good luck! ------------- His response: Joseph,
If you are not searching for a job, then it should not matter.
I appreciate your concern for my job description but it is unnecessary. Perhaps you should apply your editing skills to your own employment and further yourself in your current company. What task are you not completing while surfing the internet looking for jobs? Does your employer - Future Foundations - know that you are spending company time, money and bandwidth looking for another job? Perhaps, they should know Mr.. Jamieson?
Again, we've filled this opening and the position is no longer available.
Regards, ------------------ Now, "Future Foundations" is just my own e-mail domain name. Like many other people around here, I host my own e-mail so I keep my address no matter what ISP I use. How does this guy think he's going to scare an IT person by calling out their e-mail domain name?
I think he's a small recruiting shop, maybe even just him, as he claims to be CEO or something but also writes these job descriptions. Figures.
But these are the unprofessional people that us professionals have to deal with to get a job these days. It sucks.
I agree, although I might not have put it that way!
A lot of people are of the incorrect opinion that "If I don't use it, why should I pay for it?" It's not as simple as that.
Everyone has to contribute to society as a whole, whether you personally make use of something or not. It's our responsibility as citizens if we want to live in a civilized society.
Roads are always a good example. Just because I never drive on 90% of the roads, why should I pay for that 90%? Because it would be too expensive for only people that use the roads to pay for them. Do you want to live in a city where all the roads are dirt?
Schools? I don't have any kids but some of my tax money goes to schools. Well, once upon a time I DID go to school, and it wasn't cheap putting me through it I'm sure. One day my kids will go through school if I have them. If only parents with kids had to pay school taxes, nobody would be able to afford to put their kids through school. Do you want to live in a society where no kids are getting even a basic education?
The same can be applied to Internet connectivity. The internet is quickly becoming a basic communications tool, and more important for doing business and staying competitive both on a business and individual level. If no internet provider is willing to provide access for your town or area, why shouldn't local government be allowed to provide this? It's for the better of the society, just like roads and education. Just because Joe Shmoe might never use it, a lot of people will, and it will improve the area's productivity in so many ways.
But you can't tell this to some people, they apparently don't have the capability to think past their own $5 in their pocket.
I feel the same way in all respects. I used Redhat for a long time, and then Mandrake. I tried Debian, too, but didn't find it to be much different then an RPM based system.
I checked out Gentoo, and I was hooked. While I don't like the compile times, it's normally a non-issue when you're running on a fairly recent platform. The only parts that take a long time to compile are KDE, X, and GCC - none of which require to be upgraded very often. It's so easy to install new software and manage installed software.
Linux is a moving target, and until certian aspects of the system stabilize more, a source based distribution like Gentoo is the only way to (easily) run all the new nifty software that comes out.
And yea, KDE runs just fine on older hardware. It's easy for someone to say "AHHH BLOAT" just because the software can do more then it used to. In terms of performance, KDE is right up there.
It's the truth. I'd rather have a 20 watt CPU running fast then a 1 watt cpu that runs much slower, when I am plugged into an outlet.
While I do feel as though some power conservation could be in order; if only to reduce heat and thus fan power. But I don't care about the power usage itself - if it's silent and uses 100 watts, I'm okay with that. The wall can provide enough power.
For laptops, PDA's, phones, etc.. it's a different story. You want the batteries to last for as long as possible.
I'm hoping you're being sarcastic. Endangering lives should always be more serious then possibly, maybe, potentially, but never actually proven, theft of sales from a large corporation by downloading a song.
While downloading a music file may be illegal, it should not hold an unbelievably higher penalty. While we all know WHY it does (big time corporations) it still doesn't make sense that something should exist like this in a society where the people supposedly run their own government.
It's because there's a lot of really stupid people making laws, and some really smart lawyers trying to make more money.
There's a lot of rules that apply to one medium that does not apply to others.
You can have a dog on a rope outside barking his ass off 24 hours a day, and it's fine. But if you play your stereo for 20 minutes too loud, a neighbor can call the cops and have it turned off.
You can make a copy of a CD for backup purposes legally, but you can't circumvent the copy protection to do so without breaking the law.
You can be charged $50,000 for downloading a 2MB MP3 from an internet source, but only $300 by driving 50Mph over the speed limit.
There's so many examples of "What the hell? This makes no sense!" that it's become a sad fact of life.
Slashdot Mirror
A lot of games, at the time they hit the shelves, are capable of much better looking graphics then what is possible on the "average" PC install-base.
This has been happening for years. The game developers want the games to look even better when the next generation of machines appears as to increase the appeal of playing/buying the game for longer. (Unless, of course, it's an EA sports game. Those hit the shelves twice a year.)
Unfortunately, the game engine is so slow sometimes you'd think you were software rendering anyways, even on the fastest machines available today.
With a 512MB board, it would be a very pretty turn-based game =)
Apple screwed several manufacturers with their clone program. They allowed companies to clone the machines, and Apple sold them the OS. When Apple realized that the clone makers were making more powerful, more upgradable, and cheaper computers then any of the Macintoshes, they stopped allowing MacOS to be installed on the clones.
They started up a market and then crushed it. I'd have been pissed if I started a company to make these new clones with the blessing of Apple, only to have them punk out a year later!
Who knows the real reason Apple stopped the clone market. It seems to me that if they continued to allow MacOS installations on clones, they might have lost out on hardware sales but could have been real competition for Microsoft as an OS and Software developer. Or maybe not. But the whole clone/no clone chapter in Apple's history continues to make me believe that Apple cannot be trusted - and why I won't buy a Mac. Too much control over the platform.
EISA wasn't proprietary. ISA stood for "Industry Standard Archetecture" and the E in EISA stood for "Extended."
I was available for all manufacturers to use, and it enjoyed limited success in the server segments until PCI eventually took it over.
EISA wasn't as flexible as PCI, the slots were huge, and it wasn't as fast.
No, but it won't be as easy. During the few years of the .com boom, you could say "Yea I have windows skills!" because you run it on your home PC, and get a 70K/yr job doing IT administration. Now these same people have work experience, while still having no real skills. Sure, they can read a manual and install some systems.. but actually being GOOD at it takes more then that.
.com, but there's an overwhelming amount of ones that aren't great.
I'm not saying this applies to everyone, there's a lot of great admins out there that got in because of the
I would definately rather pay an extra $5 or whatever for a product if I believe I'm buying it form a business that's more honest.
I refuse to buy from a company that uses spam tactics to get sales.
And to add to that, I believe that all the Windows IT professionals that continue to ignore Linux will end up on the you know what end of the stick.
.com era and won't leave.
The trend towards Linux systems has been steadily going up, never down, and there's no sign of slow down.
When Linux IT jobs begin to out-number Windows IT jobs, it could even bring Information Technology as a viable career choice, one which is not filled with underqualified people that got in during the
It says:
- PC-Synchronisation MS-Outlook
Even the English version of their page is somewhat poorly translated, but it's pretty obvious they mean you can synchronize with Outlook, not that it INCLUDES outlook.
They also say there's viewers for office documents - don't confuse that with "Includes Microsoft Office."
I guess if it would be possible to port normal linux apps to it, it would be a great geak device. I'd love to be able to hack away on a linux "box" anywhere. Could run all my favorite linux console apps, and maybe even X stuff if it supported some sort of X interface.
But other then that, the Linux "Qt" PDA GUI has been used in Sharp PDA's and others, and provides most if not all (or more?) of what you'd find on a Windows CE based device.
It's possible/probable that Vonage doesn't have enough frequency band to support a modem.
>> Why should we build roads where there is little benefit to offset the costs? You're implying that people should subsidize rural development with no discernable benefit to themselves? Why?
Because it's the right thing to do! Maybe some people live on farms and grow crops to feed our fat asses - does that mean they shouldn't be have good roads and good schools? Because that's what would happen if it was privatized: there's no profit in giving these people proper utilities because it's not densly populated enough.
>> The only reason that you think schooling is "free" is because you don't directly see the costs
Who said I think it was free? Don't put words into my mouth, thanks. I actually said "I'm sure it wasn't cheap." Not sure how that implies that I think it was free?
>> Perhaps you don't quite understand capitalism. Greed and selfishness are the hallmarks of capitalism.
Although it often ends up being this way, I don't think the basis of capitalism is greed and selfeshness. I think it's free enterprise - the ability to create and bring a product or service to the market without government intervention. Just because a lot of companies are greedy sleezy companies doesn't mean that's how it all is or by definition capitalism.
>> Do you redistribute all of your disposable income to poor people?
All of it? No. But some of it, yes, it's called Taxes.
>> The question is - how to we allocate those resources? Should a small group of elite power-brokers in washington decide?
And you think things would be better in a completely privatized corporation based system of public services and government?
>> If you want to spend more than your daily usage of public utility, then you are free to do so. Just don't steal money from others who are not willing to do so.
I don't just pay into public services I don't use because I'm feeling nice. One day, I might use those services. Or my kids might, or my parents, or my friends.
And shit man, maybe I think the poor family down the road should be able to feed their family, and maybe I think the farmer out in the boondox should have a paved road and clean water to drink. Maybe I think we should all do a little bit to help out our fellow citizens and our taxes to a lot to help. If a few bucks a month out of my pocket is going to be able to do all that, then I say it's worth it.
I will say this again though, just because I don't think you're getting this: I don't think all our tax money is being used wisely. I think that a lot of things need to change. I think our current system works - we need to get rid of the abuse and corruption in our government to make things right. Privatizing things won't cure this either (see: Enron, Worldcom, etc..)
>> In fact, it is that simple. Look into capitalism sometime. Capital is never efficiently allocated by governments.
I believe that capitalism works (for the most part) in our country because it sits on top of the infrastructure provided by our public services.
>> But seriously, roads could have been built by private corporations and paid for by people that use them via tolls. Since roads are integral for business enterprise, there would be a very strong incentive for capital flow there in order to build them.
This isn't true, really. The same would happen with what we have in Internet access. Only the densely populated areas (where you can get more tolls) would get roads, and everyone else would get dirt.
>> Schools are the same way. A school would likely be more efficiently run by a private enterprise due to competitive forces. Therefore, it would be cheaper than government-run schools. If citizens value education, they will allocate capital for it.
I never said our government runs things properly, and there's a hell of a lot of room for improvement. But the truth is that the vast majority of kids can get a decent K-12 education in our country today. If it were a "pay as you go, only if you use it" program, it would be far too expensive to put your kids through 12 years of school. If it were privitized, we'd still have to have tax money pay for it..
>> The $5 that they have is theirs to do with as they wish. That's the essence of freedom.
No, this is the essence of greed and anarchy. Let the rich get richer and the poor stay where they are, right? Because that's what you do if you don't pay anything into public services unless you use them yourself. It's selfish.
>> When the government forcibly takes a chuck of that from you because "they know better" - it's the opposite of freedom.
I never said it was perfect, and I'll say again that there's a lot of room for improvement. Applying capitalizm to public works would be a disaster.
Well said =)
I like being in control of my workstation, but even as an IT engineer for the corporate network I submit to not being able to do so to the benefit of the companies ability to manage the computer environment effectively.
My guess is that this guys' engineering company is small beans if the engineers were able to raise enough stink to get a descision like that reversed.
At my company, we have over 5,000 Windows XP workstations; notebooks and desktops. A team of about 10 people manage the entire system.
With the help of Active Directory, some really neat software (Marimba) and some planning, you can manage thousands of Windows workstations with a minimal staff.
You lock down the machines (no admin logins) you manage the software versions and patches (centralized software distribution) and you don't allow users to install software on their own.
Denying admin logins alone stops 95% of all spyware.
40 workstations without any control WOULD be all an admin could handle, but when you deploy them correctly you can support over 10x that - just like any other system.
First response:
Scott Gordon [sgordon@vaco.com]
RE: Inquiry about Dice Job Number ADMEM
Thanks very much for your inquiry. We've filled this position today with someone of 12+ total years of experience.
Good luck in your job search!
------------
My response to that:
Alas, how is this possible? Active directory was first included with Windows 2000. The "2000" means the year, 2000. Being 2005 now, that means it's only been available for five years.
While I'm not trying to argue with you here, I thought I might let you know so you could fix the job description as it's inaccurate.
I consider myself very good at my trade, and I wouldn't apply for a job when the company can't get the job requirements correct - you know you're in for trouble when the boss apparently knows nothing about the technology; not even enough to realize 2000 means the year 2000. If you're a recruiting firm, you may attract more skilled people if you have an accurate description.
Fortunately I'm not looking for a job as I am already employed. Sometimes I look to see how the market is looking.
Good luck!
-------------
His response:
Joseph,
If you are not searching for a job, then it should not matter.
I appreciate your concern for my job description but it is unnecessary.
Perhaps you should apply your editing skills to your own employment and further yourself in your current company. What task are you not completing while surfing the internet looking for jobs? Does your employer - Future Foundations - know that you are spending company time, money and bandwidth looking for another job? Perhaps, they should know Mr.. Jamieson?
Again, we've filled this opening and the position is no longer available.
Regards,
------------------
Now, "Future Foundations" is just my own e-mail domain name. Like many other people around here, I host my own e-mail so I keep my address no matter what ISP I use. How does this guy think he's going to scare an IT person by calling out their e-mail domain name?
I think he's a small recruiting shop, maybe even just him, as he claims to be CEO or something but also writes these job descriptions. Figures.
But these are the unprofessional people that us professionals have to deal with to get a job these days. It sucks.
I agree, although I might not have put it that way!
A lot of people are of the incorrect opinion that "If I don't use it, why should I pay for it?" It's not as simple as that.
Everyone has to contribute to society as a whole, whether you personally make use of something or not. It's our responsibility as citizens if we want to live in a civilized society.
Roads are always a good example. Just because I never drive on 90% of the roads, why should I pay for that 90%? Because it would be too expensive for only people that use the roads to pay for them. Do you want to live in a city where all the roads are dirt?
Schools? I don't have any kids but some of my tax money goes to schools. Well, once upon a time I DID go to school, and it wasn't cheap putting me through it I'm sure. One day my kids will go through school if I have them. If only parents with kids had to pay school taxes, nobody would be able to afford to put their kids through school. Do you want to live in a society where no kids are getting even a basic education?
The same can be applied to Internet connectivity. The internet is quickly becoming a basic communications tool, and more important for doing business and staying competitive both on a business and individual level. If no internet provider is willing to provide access for your town or area, why shouldn't local government be allowed to provide this? It's for the better of the society, just like roads and education. Just because Joe Shmoe might never use it, a lot of people will, and it will improve the area's productivity in so many ways.
But you can't tell this to some people, they apparently don't have the capability to think past their own $5 in their pocket.
Still happens. Job on Dice a couple weeks ago wanted "9+ years Active Directory experience" and "5+ years Exchange 2003."
I sent a message to the company about how this was impossible, and he was a real idiot back to me.
I feel the same way in all respects. I used Redhat for a long time, and then Mandrake. I tried Debian, too, but didn't find it to be much different then an RPM based system.
I checked out Gentoo, and I was hooked. While I don't like the compile times, it's normally a non-issue when you're running on a fairly recent platform. The only parts that take a long time to compile are KDE, X, and GCC - none of which require to be upgraded very often. It's so easy to install new software and manage installed software.
Linux is a moving target, and until certian aspects of the system stabilize more, a source based distribution like Gentoo is the only way to (easily) run all the new nifty software that comes out.
And yea, KDE runs just fine on older hardware. It's easy for someone to say "AHHH BLOAT" just because the software can do more then it used to. In terms of performance, KDE is right up there.
It's the truth. I'd rather have a 20 watt CPU running fast then a 1 watt cpu that runs much slower, when I am plugged into an outlet.
While I do feel as though some power conservation could be in order; if only to reduce heat and thus fan power. But I don't care about the power usage itself - if it's silent and uses 100 watts, I'm okay with that. The wall can provide enough power.
For laptops, PDA's, phones, etc.. it's a different story. You want the batteries to last for as long as possible.
I'm hoping you're being sarcastic. Endangering lives should always be more serious then possibly, maybe, potentially, but never actually proven, theft of sales from a large corporation by downloading a song.
While downloading a music file may be illegal, it should not hold an unbelievably higher penalty. While we all know WHY it does (big time corporations) it still doesn't make sense that something should exist like this in a society where the people supposedly run their own government.
No shit, and it's so overplayed it's not funny. So I might as well meet such stereotyped "jokes" with the truth.
Because I know plenty of "linux geeks" with nice homes, nice cars, and nice girlfriends.
Does that matter?
You're not funny.
Not even close.
Keep at it! Someday you might say something funny, to someone. Probably not me, though.
It's because there's a lot of really stupid people making laws, and some really smart lawyers trying to make more money.
There's a lot of rules that apply to one medium that does not apply to others.
You can have a dog on a rope outside barking his ass off 24 hours a day, and it's fine. But if you play your stereo for 20 minutes too loud, a neighbor can call the cops and have it turned off.
You can make a copy of a CD for backup purposes legally, but you can't circumvent the copy protection to do so without breaking the law.
You can be charged $50,000 for downloading a 2MB MP3 from an internet source, but only $300 by driving 50Mph over the speed limit.
There's so many examples of "What the hell? This makes no sense!" that it's become a sad fact of life.