firefighters aren't going to have time to jack in to a network plug when they're trying to save lives.
They do actually, or at least they try. They even have time to watch streaming video and infrared sensors. Had you thought your post through a bit, you could have imagined yourself that it obviously pays to know a hazardous situation inside out before you send in more bodies.
The other touted use it to sense vibrations. I don't know about you, but I know when there's an earthquake and when there's not, I don't need a brick to tell me.
I don't know about your specific seismic abilities of course, but for us mortals 'feeling' an earthquake usually means it is too late. That is why so many peopple still die of them. I'm not saying these bricks will solve the problem of early earthquake detection, but they at least stand a better chance at it than you do.
In short, useless waste of money marketing FUD. Per norm for slashdot stories.
(Offtopic)
FUD has become a very easy label to stick on articles people don't like, but it really makes no sense at all in this context, does it? Just as a reminder: you don't have to read the slashdot stories you don't like, o.k.? Just don't piss on a technology because you are not interested in reading about it.
Interesting point!! I would actually have preferred an Aplle laptop in the very first place. I'm an Apple fan. Unfortunately, their pricing is no longer competitive. I tried to compile the same code with various optimizations on a 867 Mhz G4 and an athlon xp 1700. Same code, same compiler. This code was typical for the type of apps I run. The mac was two to six times slower and cost about 1000 euros more. I love the mac, but right now, it is not competitive. Sorry.
"Has it ever crossed your mind that the reason for this is not an evil conspiracy, but the fact that there is simply not enough CUSTOMER DEMAND to make it reasonable ?"
Well, aside from the fact that they could sell all laptops without a OS by default (as was normal until recently) there is absolutely no need to ship it with a different license, now is there? Why not put an ordinary shrinkwrapped Windows CD in the laptop's pizza box with a normal license that says: 'if you don't agree, ship me back'?
But please don't take it from me!
All the anti-MS cases so far have focused upon the fact that Microsoft bundles software with its OS. There is another, more serious matter going on though: Try to buy an A-brand laptop these days without Windows. It is virtually impossible.
Microsoft's OEM license differs from the normal Windows XP license in that it shifts the refund burden upon the manufacturer. If, by chance or design, the manufacturer does not want to give you a refund for Windows, you are stuck with a top-dollar license for an OS you are never going to use. Microsoft cannot be blamed, because it is apparently the free choice of the manufacturers to ship whatever they want with their laptops.
In Europe, there are laws against bundled sales. Basically, they say that you can't force a consumer to buy a product A when buying a product B. While these laws would certainly inhibit Microsoft from bundling their software with their OS, it does _not_ stop laptop manufacturers from bundling the OS with the hardware. Why not? Well, let's do the math:
An exception to this bundled sales law states that, if a retailer has less than 30% of both markets (in this case the retailer is, say, Sony and the markets are the OS- and laptop-markets) then, the retailer _can_ bundle products. So, if all the laptop manufacturers ship Windows with their product, that is perfectly legal, as long as no single manufacturer grabs more than 30% of the laptop market. Divide and conquer.
Of course, since nearly all laptop sales are from said big manufacturers, somewhere along this line, the consumer is screwed. It boils down to the choice of buying either a B-brand laptop without Windows or an A-brand laptop, at the cost of a voluntary 260 euro donation to Microsoft. This is immoral. It is however not illegal. Shouldn't it be?
Why do the fathers of UNIX dislike Linux so much?
on
Dennis Ritchie Interviewed
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Thompson: I view Linux as something that's not Microsoft--a backlash against Microsoft, no more and no less. I don't think it will be very successful in the long run. I've looked at the source and there are pieces that are good and pieces that are not. A whole bunch of random people have contributed to this source, and the quality varies drastically.
My experience and some of my friends' experience is that Linux is quite unreliable. Microsoft is really unreliable but Linux is worse. In a non-PC environment, it just won't hold up. If you're using it on a single box, that's one thing. But if you want to use Linux in firewalls, gateways, embedded systems, and so on, it has a long way to go.
It does make you curious as to what the exact arguments of these people against Linux are. Especially since Linux has become such a fine platform for desktop environments (KDE, Gnome) nowadays. In most people's experience, Linux has been more reliable on the desktop as well as the server for quite some time.
From the horse's mouth..
on
The End Of Minix?
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
This is an entry from Tanenbaum's personal faq. I think this explains fairly well why the comparison between Minix and production unices is fundamentally crippled:
What do you think of Linux?
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Linus for producing it. Before there was Linux there was MINIX, which had a 40,000-person newsgroup, most of whom were sending me email every day. I was going crazy with the endless stream of new features people were sending me. I kept refusing them all because I wanted to keep MINIX small enough for my students to understand in one semester. My consistent refusal to add all these new features is what inspired Linus to write Linux. Both of us are now happy with the results. The only person who is perhaps not so happy is Bill Gates. I think this is a good thing.
Comparing bloatware to an encyclopedia really doesn't make any sense:
when I read something in my encyclopedia just once, that, on average is a very nice score because reading the same thing 12 times isn't likely to happen. In other words: 'not often used' is a very relative concept when talking about encyclopedias.
When I use the pinball machine in M$ Word or the Flight Sim in Excel once in my life fur the fun of it, that doesn't exactly compare as favorably to the regular features like grammar checking and other stuff most people use them every day.
Slashdot Mirror
They do actually, or at least they try. They even have time to watch streaming video and infrared sensors. Had you thought your post through a bit, you could have imagined yourself that it obviously pays to know a hazardous situation inside out before you send in more bodies.
I don't know about your specific seismic abilities of course, but for us mortals 'feeling' an earthquake usually means it is too late. That is why so many peopple still die of them. I'm not saying these bricks will solve the problem of early earthquake detection, but they at least stand a better chance at it than you do.
(Offtopic)FUD has become a very easy label to stick on articles people don't like, but it really makes no sense at all in this context, does it? Just as a reminder: you don't have to read the slashdot stories you don't like, o.k.? Just don't piss on a technology because you are not interested in reading about it.
Interesting point!! I would actually have preferred an Aplle laptop in the very first place. I'm an Apple fan. Unfortunately, their pricing is no longer competitive. I tried to compile the same code with various optimizations on a 867 Mhz G4 and an athlon xp 1700. Same code, same compiler. This code was typical for the type of apps I run. The mac was two to six times slower and cost about 1000 euros more. I love the mac, but right now, it is not competitive. Sorry.
Well, aside from the fact that they could sell all laptops without a OS by default (as was normal until recently) there is absolutely no need to ship it with a different license, now is there? Why not put an ordinary shrinkwrapped Windows CD in the laptop's pizza box with a normal license that says: 'if you don't agree, ship me back'? But please don't take it from me!
All the anti-MS cases so far have focused upon the fact that Microsoft bundles software with its OS. There is another, more serious matter going on though: Try to buy an A-brand laptop these days without Windows. It is virtually impossible.
Microsoft's OEM license differs from the normal Windows XP license in that it shifts the refund burden upon the manufacturer. If, by chance or design, the manufacturer does not want to give you a refund for Windows, you are stuck with a top-dollar license for an OS you are never going to use. Microsoft cannot be blamed, because it is apparently the free choice of the manufacturers to ship whatever they want with their laptops.
In Europe, there are laws against bundled sales. Basically, they say that you can't force a consumer to buy a product A when buying a product B. While these laws would certainly inhibit Microsoft from bundling their software with their OS, it does _not_ stop laptop manufacturers from bundling the OS with the hardware. Why not? Well, let's do the math:
An exception to this bundled sales law states that, if a retailer has less than 30% of both markets (in this case the retailer is, say, Sony and the markets are the OS- and laptop-markets) then, the retailer _can_ bundle products. So, if all the laptop manufacturers ship Windows with their product, that is perfectly legal, as long as no single manufacturer grabs more than 30% of the laptop market. Divide and conquer.
Of course, since nearly all laptop sales are from said big manufacturers, somewhere along this line, the consumer is screwed. It boils down to the choice of buying either a B-brand laptop without Windows or an A-brand laptop, at the cost of a voluntary 260 euro donation to Microsoft. This is immoral. It is however not illegal. Shouldn't it be?
It does make you curious as to what the exact arguments of these people against Linux are. Especially since Linux has become such a fine platform for desktop environments (KDE, Gnome) nowadays. In most people's experience, Linux has been more reliable on the desktop as well as the server for quite some time.
What do you think of Linux?
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Linus for producing it. Before there was Linux there was MINIX, which had a 40,000-person newsgroup, most of whom were sending me email every day. I was going crazy with the endless stream of new features people were sending me. I kept refusing them all because I wanted to keep MINIX small enough for my students to understand in one semester. My consistent refusal to add all these new features is what inspired Linus to write Linux. Both of us are now happy with the results. The only person who is perhaps not so happy is Bill Gates. I think this is a good thing.
Comparing bloatware to an encyclopedia really doesn't make any sense:
when I read something in my encyclopedia just once, that, on average is a very nice score because reading the same thing 12 times isn't likely to happen. In other words: 'not often used' is a very relative concept when talking about encyclopedias.
When I use the pinball machine in M$ Word or the Flight Sim in Excel once in my life fur the fun of it, that doesn't exactly compare as favorably to the regular features like grammar checking and other stuff most people use them every day.