I appreciate you looking. I absolutely don't take everything our government says as solid fact, and I was just wondering what the evidence was for this one.
Our government is funny. They tell us we need to trust them, but then they say they need to keep secrets and tell lies. Great. I'd rather trust independant verification, thank you.
Congratulations! You've just won the Made Up Fact of the Hour Award!
There's no way whatsoever to prove that. You completely just made it up, probably from your own experience.
You're right, I did make that up. But the other guy started it.
And it was from my own experience. I've seen too many Windows users try to use a Mac and express some level of frustration. Often relatively simple concepts throw them off, such as the lack of right clicking (yeah, I know you can with the right mouse, so build a second button in the notebooks already), the single menu bar or the lack of being able to resize windows from any edge. Sometimes the get freaked out trying to look for files on their non-existant C:\ drive.
I made up that stat because I've never personally witnessed OS X lure someone from Windows, but I have witnessed Windows users being frustrated with OS X. You may have seen otherwise, but if I had to make a bet on maret share 2 years from now, I know where my money would go.
Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X. Well...duh! Did anyone think Apple was doing it as a public service?
Why do so many Mac users insist on this fantasy that Windows users really hate Windows and would switch to the Mac OS in a flash if only they had a chance to touch it's brushed chrome goodness? The fact is, your dislike of Windows has little bearing on wether others like it. Heck, you can even hate Windows with passion usually reserved for suicide bombers and it still would have very little influance on whether the general population would like it.
Need, coersion and ignorance are not the only reasons people use Windows. Most Windows users actually like their OS and would not want to switch. This could, in fact, be a good chunk of the reason why the vast majority of Windows users, even the ones who've seen that really cool "Dock," have not switched.
In a year or two, we'll know who's right. You'll either see a significant upturn in switchers, a bunch of people running Windows on Apple's extremely well made notebooks, or, just as likely, not much of a change at all. I can't help but think how absurd the first scenerio is. The Second is possible and, coincidentally could make Jobs Dell rich instead of merely Apple rich. Jobs doesn't need the money, but, did you notice, he does let Windows users use the iPod. And this has made him very happy.
I showed you mine (an ASAT related link) now you show me yours (hopefully an ASAT related link as well). Why do you think it was fiction, and can you provide some evidence to back it up? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to see your sources.
"We need that ability to protect our assets" in orbit.
Ok, call me an X files conspiracy theory type, but we've already got space defense systems and this is merely meant as an upgrade or additional weapons systems.
Lets examine the facts.
-we currently have more than 20 GPS sattelites in orbit. Besides helping you find the closest Starbucks, these are also used to help our soldiers find their way throug remote mountain passes and help missiles find their targets.
-Military doctrine is to control the media as soon as you can in any conflict. A large part of the media is broadcast via sattelite
-Our military insists on protecting its assets. Quick, name any military asset of regional significance that we don't guard?
-We've already have antisattelite missles. in the mid 80s, an ASAT took out a satellite in a successful test.
-China is interested in anti-satellite technology.
-Squadrons of fully operational stealth fighters were deployed and used for more than half a decade before being made public. Our military clearly is able to keep very large opperations secret for quite some time.
When I add this all up, I come to the conclusion that we already have space-based weapons designed, at a minimum, to disrupt an incoming missile. Others may have similar, which would explain why we'd be interested in lasers. The only question I really have is why they'd bother to make it public.
Certifications don't mean shit. If I was hiring someone, I'd be looking at their project experience. What I'd be looking for is a series of successful projects that were NOT all the same. THAT is what demonstrates your capacity to fix problems.
Good story. Bad conclusion. Getting their project experience tells you no more about how well they do projects than a cert will tell you how well they understand the technology. You outlined the true path in your first paragraph; have them do something of real world relevance.
I have all my applicants go through a whiteboard exercise where they build a simple network. They must drill down to various details about the network depending on the level they're applying for. True, I don't know for a fact that just because they write DHCP as one of the services they'll need that they actually know how to configure it, but I've found a very strong corelation between those that do well on the whiteboard and those who do well in their jobs.
Resumes, certs, reference lettesrs, are all just starting points. They're a place to tell you what the person wants you to believe about them. The interviewers job is to see if it's accurate or not. In a tech job that means doing tech.
Man, they could at least remake films that had some redeeming qualities in the first place.
Well, at least the concept was good. Cathartic revenge for the perpetually picked upon. Nerds using technology and cunning to strike back at those who don't understand technology and fear intelligence.
But women falling hopelessly for nerds because they're virtually gods at sex? Well, it may be true in my rare case, but how on earth could the writers think anyone else would believe such an absurd nerd fantasy.
Don't you realize that every cellphone since the beginning of time has had a tracking ability? It has to, by design...
You are missing the point.
Currently, your neighbor can watch your house 24/7/365 and keep logs of when you leave and when you go. Then they can turn those logs over to the police upon request. The thing is, nobody does this. Your neighbor might have a vague idea of when you leave and show up, particularly if their daily routine puts them in a position to notice, but only the most demented of us would keep a real log.
Now picture the government mandating such a log. They mandate all people on your block to check out and in as they leave and log it all up to the minute in case the government should need it in order to "help you" in an "emergency."
The first case is like your post. The technology to track has always existed, but nobody actually used it. The second case is what actually happened. The government decided to mandate both the logging and easy up-to-the-minute access to the tracking that has always been there.
It's not the existance of techology that's the problem. It's the way our govenment chooses to use it.
Look at it this way, yes, working at the Chevy plant is honest, respectable work, but when the plant shuts down you best find some other job.
I consider pro gaming at least as respectable as pro baseball (maybe more if you count in steroid usage). But just like when that XFL league shut down a few years ago, these pros need to stop moaning and go look elseware for employment.
Yeah, I know it's hard. Buddy, it's hard for all of us. My NT4.0 skills go completely unused these days. But I've since found work that doesnt' include NT4.0 and I'm doing more than ok. So will f@+@!1+i (or however you spell his name).
The biggest reason that voluntary systems exist is because of wide adoption in the industries in question. With the video game rating system, congress was on the verge of mandating ratings when the industry decided to do their own in a (successful) atempt to avoid burdensome government regulation. So far, the the only thing the internet porn industry has volunteered to do is decieve the consumer.
I don't really care if it's a voluntary or government mandated rating system on the web, but I'm getting sick and tired of mistyping URLs and finding porn, especially at work. I hate the fact that my daughter is subject to finding porn if she's looking for ponies (OMG!) or bicyles on the web. I'm not asking for censorship and I'm not asking to make it difficult to get to porn, all I'm asking for is good, honest lableing so I can avoid it if I want to.
Hell, I'm a consumer of porn too. I'm looking forward to porn.google.com where I can type in "redhead" and not get a bunch of other junk. That'll never happen unless we get some honest lableing.
that this would be delayed. Just goes to show that even a fine company like this can make its share of time-to-market mistakes. I just hope it comes out in time to play Duke Nukem Forever. I couldn't envision playing the game any other way.
So I guess the Victoria's Secret site is going to be illegal,too?
See, this is the problem. Identifying types information is not the same as censoring it.
I think it's incredibly valuable to have both the video game and movie rating systems. Yes, they're imperfect, but at least they give me a starting place. Ever try to rent anime for your 12 year old daughter? A whole lot of it isnt' rated. I had to start prescreening all of it after getting burned a couple of times by stuff that looked harmless on the cover.
With sites like whitehouse.com, sanfransisco.com and others, people are often getting fed material they don't want. Requiring proper labling so people can make these choices for themselves is not only NOT censorship, but it's really just treating people respectfully.
As long as the application is available in one way or another to those with disabilites, then there's likely nothing you can do.
I agree. Although I have sympathy for the user of an apparently broken terminal, I presume all applicants faced a similar burden. I must confess to being a bit alarmed by this line, however:
Can this be considered discriminatory to those of a lower education level in their attempt to obtain a job, as well?
There is no such thing as discrimination based on education. People with more education get more jobs, get better jobs, and are generally quite deserving of their superior status in the job market.
In a day and age where shelf stockers are as likely as anyone else to use computerized inventory equipment, I'd be just as happy to weed out anyone who was incapable of filling out a computerized application. If this guy can't do it, he definately needs some education, definately needs it quick and definately should not rely on the legal system to solve his problems.
TW
Re:The problem of nerve impulse conduction
on
An Alternate Human
·
· Score: 1
For this reason, I wouldn't expect many species to evolve with a larger-than-necessary distance between their brain and their sensory organs (unless such creature evolved a much faster method of conducting nerve impulses than we possess).
The sense of touch in my feet does not appear to be having a problem with distance. Maybe I just don't notice the latency, but I definately have sensory receptors all over the body that work just fine.
I think what Ebert was trying to say is that art must have the capacity to stimulate the emotions to some extent beyond "cool" or the elation or sadness of competion.
Though I don't get into the Final Fantasy titles myself, I've heard other say a particular one had made them cry. That has the potential to be art. If a video game were to elicit the electricity of your first kiss, then that would be art. If a video game were to remind you of the shame of rejection or the despair of losing a loved one, that would be art.
But if all a video game does is look kick ass and make you feel awesome for winning the game, then that is not enough to be considered art, even if it's beautiful along the way. This is what the vast majority of video games do (at best). You may be able to argue that video games have the capacity for art, and I would not disagree, but I would think twice about saying that video games as a whole currently represent a medium of artistic expression. It just isn't so.
The Playstation series doesn't exactly have a great history of providing games for young kids either. If you want a game system to appeal to the whole family if you have young children, the best bet would probably be the Nintendo Revolution.
Why wait, how about the GameCube? Or the N64? Or a PacMan game-in-a-joystick?
Seriously, 6-year-olds don't really care that much about the latest thing. They like video games, but if left to themselves I think it's about as likely they'd go for the PacMan as the revolution.
All this is out the window if they have teenage siblings. If they have siblings, they immediatly like whatever the sibling plays.
What about something the whole family will enjoy? I'll ask you this, have you ever been part of a 4+ person family and tried to order pizza? Sounds easy, but it can be hell. Everyone has a different favorite pizza joint and wants different toppings. You will never make everyone completely satisfied with a single choice. The only options are to accept that some family members will not be fully satisfied, or order more than one.
At least it's closer to correct than the Slashdot headline. Open standards, which the report encourages, is a far cry from open source, which the report specifically stays neutral on.
I don't gain any insight from it, it's not entertaining, it's not informative, it's a push for Nintendo. Or am I missing something vital?
You're missing something vital. People always ask this kind of thing when there's some kind of positive review on Slashdot. Positive reviews can happen when a reviewer likes the product they're reviewing, not just when the reviewer is a shill. This kind of review can actually be useful to some of us because we get to learn more details about a product that we can then consider purchasing.
I'm glad reviews aren't the backbone of Slashdot, but they can be valuable "News for Nerds." Yes, even the positive ones.
You make excellent points, except I think you underestimate the visual differences. For starters, I haven't seen an HD-DVD and I don't know if the difference will be night and day. But there will be at least two effects you're likely to notice.
1. Stair step. Every time you increase resolution, you get rid of some of the "stair step" effect. Virtually everyone can see this when they look at straight lines running at an angle on the screen. It can be distracting, even to those who claim not to notice differences in resolution. When these people see the two techologies side by side, the difference should be very noticable.
2. Scaling issues. A lot of HDTVs do a mediocre to bad job at upscaling DVD content. Even the ones that do a good job don't generally do a great job. Those scaling issues shouldn't be noticable with native HD content. Once again, even novices should be able to clearly see the difference side by side.
3. As a bonus issue, I've seen some pretty bad over-the-air HD content. Other stuff looks great. The HD-DVD should be a pretty uniformly good source, in much the same way that DVDs beat out a lot of over-the-air digital content.
This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather just a few items where people who say they can't tell a difference are likely to be able to, well, tell a difference. I'm not saying everyone should rush out and get lots of brand new crap. If it's not for you, then it's not for you. But I highly recommend you at least take a look before saying the difference isn't that great. I think you might be surprised.
Bill and Steve have developed big 'ol shit eating grins at this very moment and can't quite figure out why.
Steve turns to Bill, "it's a great disturbance as if millions of voices searching for Freedom were suddenly silenced."
"Yes," Bill says, "now their failure is complete."
Ok, enough with the dumb Star Wars crap. Without ideology, open source is nothing but commercial software. When supposed Open Source proponents say usability beats ideology, they might as well pack it in and use Windows or OSX.
"But OSX is open source!" I can hear some of you cry. Bullshit. Try to get it for free, modify it and then sell it back to Steve. Carefuuuulllllll. Don't modify the wrong module. You just might get sued. If you want Linux to look like this, an open source minefield, then please proceed with your "useability trumps all" method of thinking. Personaly, I prefer an OS that I really can do whatever I want with.
Energy shortage is no more a disaster than most other shortages, provided you have an economy based on supply and demand.
Look at water. Many people have claimed that there would be water shortages in the California. Everyone should conserve water because we're running out. Now look in the Middle East. People have no problem paying for desalination plants. But you never hear them talk about water conservation in the Mid East, because who on Earth would waste such an expensive resource as water? California would find it has plenty of water if people have to pay what water is worth.
The reason we face energy shortages has nothing to do with the fact that we're running out. It has to do with the fact that we waste it. When the price gets high enough, provided of course that the government lets it get high, then you'll find out people get quite resourceful about conservation. You'll also find that there is plenty of energy to do the things we must.
Nokia's 770 platform is only just starting. [newsforge.com] The 770 is available for retail sale, but not really intended for the general public.
There's an upcoming release of the linux derived O/S it runs (in 2006) and Nokia are actively courting developers. (including discounts for gnome hackers)
I say kudos to nokia - they're (as the review shows) releasing a cool bit of hardware kit and they're going to let the software developement community (both free, open & proprietary) fill in lots of gaps. I hope it works out.
This is a poor excuse, and one that Linux proponents are too quick to use. The fact is that most consumers don't care what the platform is and care even less what the product roadmap is. What they care about is how well the thing they just bought works.
Now in some ways this review is a hachet job. Really, I like keyboards and all, but plenty of PDAs come without them and it's considered a design choice, not a fatal flaw. Also, many of those PDAs won't get much more than 4.5 hours of constant use before the battery says goodbye.
But application crashes? Long boot times? Once again, forget the platform and forget the roadmap. If it were Windows Mobile, what would you be saying? Yeah, that's what I thought.
Linux people need to get used to one fact and they need to get used to it fast. The stuff better work well, without excuses or promises for the future, if they want consumers to use it. Otherwise it's just some broken shit that doesn't deserve the light of day.
Even a huge number of desirable web apps do not work as well with non-MS browsers.
Name them.
I'm not actually going to name these for obvious reasons, but several of my companies web apps, both the ones we sell and the ones we use internally, require IE to function at all. My companie is a $120 million a year business software company that's number one or two in several of the software categories we sell in.
It's not even a subject we have a fire under our ass to change, either. The fact is that our customers just aren't asking for non-IE browser support in any significant numbers.
Then there's Yahoo mail and Outlook Web Access. Each offers reduced functionality to non-IE clients.
There are others. Lots of others. No, I can't name them all, but every VB developer turned.NET developer is writing them and there are a shitload of.NET developers out there.
On the other subject of whether quality matters. It does. You're right. But it doesn't matter very much to the specific subject of whether or not MS will stay dominant. If it was a night and day difference where MS had an unusable OS then the matter might be different. But most people don't percieve Windows to be unworkable or, alternatively, they view any problems as their own computer ineptitude.
In this environment, other factors are more important than quality. You name several of them. But the most imporant subject to most people is whether or not they feel they'll be able to use all the software they might want to. Sure, many consumrers and many business people just use the web and email, but if they percieve that they might need something else then they also usually feel that they don't want their choices restricted. Which OS company provides that perceived lack of restriction best?
I'm not arguing the MS is best or that Powerbooks don't matter. I'm just saying that even if you win the arguments that Powerbooks, dollar for dollar, offer much better value than a Dell with Windows, that win will not matter enough to put Apple on top.
Real at #9 was a surprise to me too. I wonder if others were surprised about Yahoo being #1? Everyone is so in love with Google these days that it's natural to assume it would be number one. It's nice to see an early internet inovator like Yahoo chugging along quietly, just doing it's thing at the top of the list.
It's hillarious that people are arguing which is better. Which is better is not relevant. What's relevant is that Microsoft OSs currently have a lock on the market for applications that are commonly desired by a wide range of consumers and businesses. Even a huge number of desirable web apps do not work as well with non-MS browsers. As long as this is the case, neither Apple, Linux or any other kind of OS has any real chance of dethoning the king.
Apple may make better computers and may have a superior OS. That will not be enough to have consumers or businesses switching in numbers significant enough to threaten Microsoft's monopoly.
Slashdot Mirror
I appreciate you looking. I absolutely don't take everything our government says as solid fact, and I was just wondering what the evidence was for this one.
Our government is funny. They tell us we need to trust them, but then they say they need to keep secrets and tell lies. Great. I'd rather trust independant verification, thank you.
TW
Congratulations! You've just won the Made Up Fact of the Hour Award!
There's no way whatsoever to prove that. You completely just made it up, probably from your own experience.
You're right, I did make that up. But the other guy started it.
And it was from my own experience. I've seen too many Windows users try to use a Mac and express some level of frustration. Often relatively simple concepts throw them off, such as the lack of right clicking (yeah, I know you can with the right mouse, so build a second button in the notebooks already), the single menu bar or the lack of being able to resize windows from any edge. Sometimes the get freaked out trying to look for files on their non-existant C:\ drive.
I made up that stat because I've never personally witnessed OS X lure someone from Windows, but I have witnessed Windows users being frustrated with OS X. You may have seen otherwise, but if I had to make a bet on maret share 2 years from now, I know where my money would go.
TW
Boot Camp is really just a plan to get Windows users to convert to OS X.
Well...duh! Did anyone think Apple was doing it as a public service?
Why do so many Mac users insist on this fantasy that Windows users really hate Windows and would switch to the Mac OS in a flash if only they had a chance to touch it's brushed chrome goodness? The fact is, your dislike of Windows has little bearing on wether others like it. Heck, you can even hate Windows with passion usually reserved for suicide bombers and it still would have very little influance on whether the general population would like it.
Need, coersion and ignorance are not the only reasons people use Windows. Most Windows users actually like their OS and would not want to switch. This could, in fact, be a good chunk of the reason why the vast majority of Windows users, even the ones who've seen that really cool "Dock," have not switched.
In a year or two, we'll know who's right. You'll either see a significant upturn in switchers, a bunch of people running Windows on Apple's extremely well made notebooks, or, just as likely, not much of a change at all. I can't help but think how absurd the first scenerio is. The Second is possible and, coincidentally could make Jobs Dell rich instead of merely Apple rich. Jobs doesn't need the money, but, did you notice, he does let Windows users use the iPod. And this has made him very happy.
TW
I showed you mine (an ASAT related link) now you show me yours (hopefully an ASAT related link as well). Why do you think it was fiction, and can you provide some evidence to back it up? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'd just like to see your sources.
TW
"We need that ability to protect our assets" in orbit.
Ok, call me an X files conspiracy theory type, but we've already got space defense systems and this is merely meant as an upgrade or additional weapons systems.
Lets examine the facts.
-we currently have more than 20 GPS sattelites in orbit. Besides helping you find the closest Starbucks, these are also used to help our soldiers find their way throug remote mountain passes and help missiles find their targets.
-Military doctrine is to control the media as soon as you can in any conflict. A large part of the media is broadcast via sattelite
-Our military insists on protecting its assets. Quick, name any military asset of regional significance that we don't guard?
-We've already have antisattelite missles. in the mid 80s, an ASAT took out a satellite in a successful test.
-China is interested in anti-satellite technology.
-Squadrons of fully operational stealth fighters were deployed and used for more than half a decade before being made public. Our military clearly is able to keep very large opperations secret for quite some time.
When I add this all up, I come to the conclusion that we already have space-based weapons designed, at a minimum, to disrupt an incoming missile. Others may have similar, which would explain why we'd be interested in lasers. The only question I really have is why they'd bother to make it public.
TW
Certifications don't mean shit. If I was hiring someone, I'd be looking at their project experience. What I'd be looking for is a series of successful projects that were NOT all the same. THAT is what demonstrates your capacity to fix problems.
Good story. Bad conclusion. Getting their project experience tells you no more about how well they do projects than a cert will tell you how well they understand the technology. You outlined the true path in your first paragraph; have them do something of real world relevance.
I have all my applicants go through a whiteboard exercise where they build a simple network. They must drill down to various details about the network depending on the level they're applying for. True, I don't know for a fact that just because they write DHCP as one of the services they'll need that they actually know how to configure it, but I've found a very strong corelation between those that do well on the whiteboard and those who do well in their jobs.
Resumes, certs, reference lettesrs, are all just starting points. They're a place to tell you what the person wants you to believe about them. The interviewers job is to see if it's accurate or not. In a tech job that means doing tech.
TW
Man, they could at least remake films that had some redeeming qualities in the first place.
Well, at least the concept was good. Cathartic revenge for the perpetually picked upon. Nerds using technology and cunning to strike back at those who don't understand technology and fear intelligence.
But women falling hopelessly for nerds because they're virtually gods at sex? Well, it may be true in my rare case, but how on earth could the writers think anyone else would believe such an absurd nerd fantasy.
TW
Don't you realize that every cellphone since the beginning of time has had a tracking ability? It has to, by design...
You are missing the point.
Currently, your neighbor can watch your house 24/7/365 and keep logs of when you leave and when you go. Then they can turn those logs over to the police upon request. The thing is, nobody does this. Your neighbor might have a vague idea of when you leave and show up, particularly if their daily routine puts them in a position to notice, but only the most demented of us would keep a real log.
Now picture the government mandating such a log. They mandate all people on your block to check out and in as they leave and log it all up to the minute in case the government should need it in order to "help you" in an "emergency."
The first case is like your post. The technology to track has always existed, but nobody actually used it. The second case is what actually happened. The government decided to mandate both the logging and easy up-to-the-minute access to the tracking that has always been there.
It's not the existance of techology that's the problem. It's the way our govenment chooses to use it.
TW
You're right, but so are they.
Look at it this way, yes, working at the Chevy plant is honest, respectable work, but when the plant shuts down you best find some other job.
I consider pro gaming at least as respectable as pro baseball (maybe more if you count in steroid usage). But just like when that XFL league shut down a few years ago, these pros need to stop moaning and go look elseware for employment.
Yeah, I know it's hard. Buddy, it's hard for all of us. My NT4.0 skills go completely unused these days. But I've since found work that doesnt' include NT4.0 and I'm doing more than ok. So will f@+@!1+i (or however you spell his name).
TW
The biggest reason that voluntary systems exist is because of wide adoption in the industries in question. With the video game rating system, congress was on the verge of mandating ratings when the industry decided to do their own in a (successful) atempt to avoid burdensome government regulation. So far, the the only thing the internet porn industry has volunteered to do is decieve the consumer.
I don't really care if it's a voluntary or government mandated rating system on the web, but I'm getting sick and tired of mistyping URLs and finding porn, especially at work. I hate the fact that my daughter is subject to finding porn if she's looking for ponies (OMG!) or bicyles on the web. I'm not asking for censorship and I'm not asking to make it difficult to get to porn, all I'm asking for is good, honest lableing so I can avoid it if I want to.
Hell, I'm a consumer of porn too. I'm looking forward to porn.google.com where I can type in "redhead" and not get a bunch of other junk. That'll never happen unless we get some honest lableing.
TW
that this would be delayed. Just goes to show that even a fine company like this can make its share of time-to-market mistakes. I just hope it comes out in time to play Duke Nukem Forever. I couldn't envision playing the game any other way.
TW
So I guess the Victoria's Secret site is going to be illegal,too?
See, this is the problem. Identifying types information is not the same as censoring it.
I think it's incredibly valuable to have both the video game and movie rating systems. Yes, they're imperfect, but at least they give me a starting place. Ever try to rent anime for your 12 year old daughter? A whole lot of it isnt' rated. I had to start prescreening all of it after getting burned a couple of times by stuff that looked harmless on the cover.
With sites like whitehouse.com, sanfransisco.com and others, people are often getting fed material they don't want. Requiring proper labling so people can make these choices for themselves is not only NOT censorship, but it's really just treating people respectfully.
TW
As long as the application is available in one way or another to those with disabilites, then there's likely nothing you can do.
I agree. Although I have sympathy for the user of an apparently broken terminal, I presume all applicants faced a similar burden. I must confess to being a bit alarmed by this line, however:
Can this be considered discriminatory to those of a lower education level in their attempt to obtain a job, as well?
There is no such thing as discrimination based on education. People with more education get more jobs, get better jobs, and are generally quite deserving of their superior status in the job market.
In a day and age where shelf stockers are as likely as anyone else to use computerized inventory equipment, I'd be just as happy to weed out anyone who was incapable of filling out a computerized application. If this guy can't do it, he definately needs some education, definately needs it quick and definately should not rely on the legal system to solve his problems.
TW
For this reason, I wouldn't expect many species to evolve with a larger-than-necessary distance between their brain and their sensory organs (unless such creature evolved a much faster method of conducting nerve impulses than we possess).
The sense of touch in my feet does not appear to be having a problem with distance. Maybe I just don't notice the latency, but I definately have sensory receptors all over the body that work just fine.
TW
I think what Ebert was trying to say is that art must have the capacity to stimulate the emotions to some extent beyond "cool" or the elation or sadness of competion.
Though I don't get into the Final Fantasy titles myself, I've heard other say a particular one had made them cry. That has the potential to be art. If a video game were to elicit the electricity of your first kiss, then that would be art. If a video game were to remind you of the shame of rejection or the despair of losing a loved one, that would be art.
But if all a video game does is look kick ass and make you feel awesome for winning the game, then that is not enough to be considered art, even if it's beautiful along the way. This is what the vast majority of video games do (at best). You may be able to argue that video games have the capacity for art, and I would not disagree, but I would think twice about saying that video games as a whole currently represent a medium of artistic expression. It just isn't so.
TW
The Playstation series doesn't exactly have a great history of providing games for young kids either. If you want a game system to appeal to the whole family if you have young children, the best bet would probably be the Nintendo Revolution.
Why wait, how about the GameCube? Or the N64? Or a PacMan game-in-a-joystick?
Seriously, 6-year-olds don't really care that much about the latest thing. They like video games, but if left to themselves I think it's about as likely they'd go for the PacMan as the revolution.
All this is out the window if they have teenage siblings. If they have siblings, they immediatly like whatever the sibling plays.
What about something the whole family will enjoy? I'll ask you this, have you ever been part of a 4+ person family and tried to order pizza? Sounds easy, but it can be hell. Everyone has a different favorite pizza joint and wants different toppings. You will never make everyone completely satisfied with a single choice. The only options are to accept that some family members will not be fully satisfied, or order more than one.
TW
LinuxDevices' summary is a tad misleading...
At least it's closer to correct than the Slashdot headline. Open standards, which the report encourages, is a far cry from open source, which the report specifically stays neutral on.
TW
I don't gain any insight from it, it's not entertaining, it's not informative, it's a push for Nintendo. Or am I missing something vital?
You're missing something vital. People always ask this kind of thing when there's some kind of positive review on Slashdot. Positive reviews can happen when a reviewer likes the product they're reviewing, not just when the reviewer is a shill. This kind of review can actually be useful to some of us because we get to learn more details about a product that we can then consider purchasing.
I'm glad reviews aren't the backbone of Slashdot, but they can be valuable "News for Nerds." Yes, even the positive ones.
TW
You make excellent points, except I think you underestimate the visual differences. For starters, I haven't seen an HD-DVD and I don't know if the difference will be night and day. But there will be at least two effects you're likely to notice.
1. Stair step. Every time you increase resolution, you get rid of some of the "stair step" effect. Virtually everyone can see this when they look at straight lines running at an angle on the screen. It can be distracting, even to those who claim not to notice differences in resolution. When these people see the two techologies side by side, the difference should be very noticable.
2. Scaling issues. A lot of HDTVs do a mediocre to bad job at upscaling DVD content. Even the ones that do a good job don't generally do a great job. Those scaling issues shouldn't be noticable with native HD content. Once again, even novices should be able to clearly see the difference side by side.
3. As a bonus issue, I've seen some pretty bad over-the-air HD content. Other stuff looks great. The HD-DVD should be a pretty uniformly good source, in much the same way that DVDs beat out a lot of over-the-air digital content.
This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather just a few items where people who say they can't tell a difference are likely to be able to, well, tell a difference. I'm not saying everyone should rush out and get lots of brand new crap. If it's not for you, then it's not for you. But I highly recommend you at least take a look before saying the difference isn't that great. I think you might be surprised.
TW
Useability beats ideology.
Bill and Steve have developed big 'ol shit eating grins at this very moment and can't quite figure out why.
Steve turns to Bill, "it's a great disturbance as if millions of voices searching for Freedom were suddenly silenced."
"Yes," Bill says, "now their failure is complete."
Ok, enough with the dumb Star Wars crap. Without ideology, open source is nothing but commercial software. When supposed Open Source proponents say usability beats ideology, they might as well pack it in and use Windows or OSX.
"But OSX is open source!" I can hear some of you cry. Bullshit. Try to get it for free, modify it and then sell it back to Steve. Carefuuuulllllll. Don't modify the wrong module. You just might get sued. If you want Linux to look like this, an open source minefield, then please proceed with your "useability trumps all" method of thinking. Personaly, I prefer an OS that I really can do whatever I want with.
TW
Energy shortage is no more a disaster than most other shortages, provided you have an economy based on supply and demand.
Look at water. Many people have claimed that there would be water shortages in the California. Everyone should conserve water because we're running out. Now look in the Middle East. People have no problem paying for desalination plants. But you never hear them talk about water conservation in the Mid East, because who on Earth would waste such an expensive resource as water? California would find it has plenty of water if people have to pay what water is worth.
The reason we face energy shortages has nothing to do with the fact that we're running out. It has to do with the fact that we waste it. When the price gets high enough, provided of course that the government lets it get high, then you'll find out people get quite resourceful about conservation. You'll also find that there is plenty of energy to do the things we must.
TW
Nokia's 770 platform is only just starting. [newsforge.com] The 770 is available for retail sale, but not really intended for the general public.
There's an upcoming release of the linux derived O/S it runs (in 2006) and Nokia are actively courting developers. (including discounts for gnome hackers)
I say kudos to nokia - they're (as the review shows) releasing a cool bit of hardware kit and they're going to let the software developement community (both free, open & proprietary) fill in lots of gaps. I hope it works out.
This is a poor excuse, and one that Linux proponents are too quick to use. The fact is that most consumers don't care what the platform is and care even less what the product roadmap is. What they care about is how well the thing they just bought works.
Now in some ways this review is a hachet job. Really, I like keyboards and all, but plenty of PDAs come without them and it's considered a design choice, not a fatal flaw. Also, many of those PDAs won't get much more than 4.5 hours of constant use before the battery says goodbye.
But application crashes? Long boot times? Once again, forget the platform and forget the roadmap. If it were Windows Mobile, what would you be saying? Yeah, that's what I thought.
Linux people need to get used to one fact and they need to get used to it fast. The stuff better work well, without excuses or promises for the future, if they want consumers to use it. Otherwise it's just some broken shit that doesn't deserve the light of day.
TW
Even a huge number of desirable web apps do not work as well with non-MS browsers.
.NET developer is writing them and there are a shitload of .NET developers out there.
Name them.
I'm not actually going to name these for obvious reasons, but several of my companies web apps, both the ones we sell and the ones we use internally, require IE to function at all. My companie is a $120 million a year business software company that's number one or two in several of the software categories we sell in.
It's not even a subject we have a fire under our ass to change, either. The fact is that our customers just aren't asking for non-IE browser support in any significant numbers.
Then there's Yahoo mail and Outlook Web Access. Each offers reduced functionality to non-IE clients.
There are others. Lots of others. No, I can't name them all, but every VB developer turned
On the other subject of whether quality matters. It does. You're right. But it doesn't matter very much to the specific subject of whether or not MS will stay dominant. If it was a night and day difference where MS had an unusable OS then the matter might be different. But most people don't percieve Windows to be unworkable or, alternatively, they view any problems as their own computer ineptitude.
In this environment, other factors are more important than quality. You name several of them. But the most imporant subject to most people is whether or not they feel they'll be able to use all the software they might want to. Sure, many consumrers and many business people just use the web and email, but if they percieve that they might need something else then they also usually feel that they don't want their choices restricted. Which OS company provides that perceived lack of restriction best?
I'm not arguing the MS is best or that Powerbooks don't matter. I'm just saying that even if you win the arguments that Powerbooks, dollar for dollar, offer much better value than a Dell with Windows, that win will not matter enough to put Apple on top.
TW
Real at #9 was a surprise to me too. I wonder if others were surprised about Yahoo being #1? Everyone is so in love with Google these days that it's natural to assume it would be number one. It's nice to see an early internet inovator like Yahoo chugging along quietly, just doing it's thing at the top of the list.
TW
It's hillarious that people are arguing which is better. Which is better is not relevant. What's relevant is that Microsoft OSs currently have a lock on the market for applications that are commonly desired by a wide range of consumers and businesses. Even a huge number of desirable web apps do not work as well with non-MS browsers. As long as this is the case, neither Apple, Linux or any other kind of OS has any real chance of dethoning the king.
Apple may make better computers and may have a superior OS. That will not be enough to have consumers or businesses switching in numbers significant enough to threaten Microsoft's monopoly.
TW