Yes, and many of the Linux comments such as yours are all the same, they speak of the "open future". Well, honestly I think that is great but I'm interested in using my computer right now. Photoshop is an amazing program and it is the standard for digital photography work. I have used Open Office and while I liked some of its features, MS Office just feels more polished. It's not just about PS or Office either, its about using the platform as a whole. For instance I own a Canon Digital Rebel which comes with some Canon software that only works on Windows and OS X. Now I'm sure I could find OSS that provides the same function, but when I want to do ditigial photography...I want to do digital photography not hunt for software on the net. To me, that is the key difference right now. Linux is great for some applications (even on the desktop for certain users) but its not great for me. Isn't that what choice is all about? Using what works for me? Also, I think the fact that the article makes it clear how shocked the author is that everything works out of the box tells how far Linux still needs to come.
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux and I think it is great that you can finally buy a Linux laptop where everything just works, but I still think it trails behind Apple. I can run Photoshop and MS Office on my iBook without any gimmicks or compromises like I would need to run them on a Linux laptop. Also, when I buy new hardware or look for a new program, there is a pretty good chance that there is support of OS X. The chance of finding mainstream items that support Linux is still very slim.
Yes but the attack may or may not happen tomorrow. I know what the author was trying to get at here, but honestly that was a funny choice of wording. I would say that every single day the internet may or may not be attacked. Every single day the sun may or may not explode. You could say something similar for just about every circumstance.
Actually, Java can be just as fast as C or C++ code in the right situations. I think the best place for Java is on the server. Here apps run for long times and overhead doesn't have to be a huge issue. Java VMs are capable of predicting the code's branches after it has run for some time, so it seems that it can be quite efficient on a server. Also, I don't think that the cross-platform support is what would necessarily make Java "slow" since each VM can be fined tuned for the platform that it is designed for.
I know that some people really can't take change when it comes to computers, but to me changing the browser has always been the easiest change. The back, foward, home, and stop buttons are almost always in the same general area and the address bar usually functions in the exact same way. The only thing that usually shows a relatively large change between the browsers is bookmarks. My family used IE for everything and one day I switched them to Firefox without mentioning anything. I was just kind of waiting to see what kind of questions I would get, but the only one I've heard so far was my mother asking if I changed the browser. They are probably indifferent as to what browser they use, but at least I know that using Firefox is better for them!
The article seems a little off in what it says. First of all, I would imagine the ability to create new techniques quckly and with the best results is one of the main selling points for CG companies. For instance, with Perfect Storm, ILM had to write the water effects program from stratch. A lot of research and development had to go into this program. I don't think this is something that ILM really wants to give away for free and it certainly wasn't something that was simple to create. Also, I think that not everything should be given to open source. Don't get me wrong, open source is great for applications that are widely spread (operating systems, browsers) but if you make all of your income off of innovative graphics for movies do you really want to give away your innovative graphic software? Also, this type of software is not the stuff that will benefit a large amount of computer users. It just isn't something that would be a huge benefit to the community as a whole.
While many things that the Cray CTO said are true, I think the issue (obviously) has be skewed some. It really depends on the problem you are solving. Some problems will need to have data shared between all of the the nodes, but others will require that each node only has access to the data that is important to the small part of the problem that it solves. Also, the CTO mentioned that clusters don't scale very well. I don't really know what made him think this, but it seems to me that clusters do scale pretty well. For instance, ILM supposedly uses all of its employee's workstations at night to help do the daily renders. This way all of the cpus sitting on desks don't go unused during off hours.
What I have heard is that Bill Gates has said on a few occasions that if he were to get in contact with Nintendo he would immediately offer to buy them. I think Nintendo is a company that MS would like to own. In fact I think they made a bid for Nintendo and Sega when they were first creating the Xbox. At this point, it just seems like the offer is always there is Nintendo is willing to take it.
My favorite thing at the airport is the sign that tells you what you can't bring on and it has a very cartoon looking bomb on it. That should definetly keep Wiley E. Coyote off of the plane.
True, I don't think that ads should break up a show, but since ads are a fact of life, I think that after the show is over if I have to view ads they should at least be on a topic that I am interested in.
Yes, the whole fake "unlimited" deal with Comcast is kind of upsetting, luckily I have never run into that sort of problem with my internet service from them. Hopefully they will never impose that sort of thing on On Demand television, I mean the whole point is to view what you want, when you want.
I'm not so sure they necessarily meant web content as in web pages but more online resources. For example, they mention being able to pull a movie from a Netflix like website and view it whenever you please, the same could be done for other online videos or news sources. At least, this is what I hope they mean. I don't want to read any websites while watching something either. I think what really needs to happen first is for more publishers to put good content online, then devices like TiVo can make the most of it.
An interesting point that the article speaks briefly about is advertising and how advertisers hate Tivo because it can skip adds. The article mentions using Tivo's stat keeping to target a customer more directly and deliever relevant ads. I think this is really the future for advertising, not the static model of current television. For instance, I hate most adds because I'm not interested in what they are selling. I don't care if the newest Maxi pad can absorb a whole pitcher of iced tea, as a male I'm never going to need them. I often find car commercials very, very annoying, but when I was looking for a new car it was uesful to know what companies were having incentives. If ad companies could send me ads about products or television shows that I would be interested in, I think I might actually like to view them. Hopefully services like Tivo will help to bring this about.
Not everything on On Demand is pay per view. In fact, the only thing I have found so far that is PPV are movies, and even this doesn't have to be PPV, for instance, my package came with Starz for free, so whatever movies Starz is playing I can watch on On Demand for free. All of the normal television channels are free also. The only ones I have really looked at are Comedy Central and Adult Swim. You can watch whatever shows they have listed with no PPV fees. I think PPV movies mainly competes with video rentals (and that seems to be the way Comcast advertises it). You are right though, if Comcast ever did make every show PPV, I would not want to watch it, but I would really love if I could see any episode from every season of Seinfeld whenever I want, which is something that they don't do yet.
This might be a little off topic, but I think its ok since it deals with TIVO's competition. I recently had Comcast digital cable installed and have been playing around with the On Demand feature. So far it seems like a promising feature, but needs much more content. The thing I like about On Demand is, unlike TIVO, is that I can watch something that didn't necessarily air yet (although in reality almost all of the content is previously aired stuff). I think that as soon as networks start to embrace On Demand type services more, it will be a big hit, making boxes like TIVO almost obsolete. I think what they should strive for now is putting up entire old seasons of television shows. I think it would be great to be able to watch any episode of Futurama when I want and for series that are still being run, they could add the new episodes a day after they air. On Demand should shape up to be a great technology, but right now it definetly needs better content. I can't really complain seeing how it comes free with any digital cable package. However, since they do use it as a major selling point I think Comcast should work with the networks to get better grade material on it. Once they do, I will never want to use a TIVO.
Just looking at the Netscrape icon reminds me of my high school where they used Nutscrape 4.x (despite what you might be thinking I graduated in 2003...yes my high school sucked when it came to software). This memory alone is enough to make me want to stray away from the newest Netscape. But on a more serious note, is there anything that the Netscape release offers that Mozilla/Firefox doesn't? If there is nothing, then the only purpose that I can see to Netscape is as a possibly more comfortable way to switch people from IE. It seems to me like more people probably remember Netscape and feel comfortable with it rather than some "open source", animal toting browser that they probably have never heard of before.
How much of the total traffic on the internet is from viruses/worms looking for targets? It's not that I really worry about getting infected, but I want to get all the bandwidth I can from my cable modem and I don't need rogue computer programs making the net crappier for everyone else!
Well, according to my research Java doesn't even exist! There are absolutely no servers existing in the.java domain. However, there are many, many servers with.net. Apparently, Java has much catching up to do if they ever want to pass Microsoft.
If this is true then I have to say that OS X is like one of those spiffy manumatic transmission - you get all the control you want, but the simplicity of automatic if you wish:)
"I my opinion all this Linux vs. Microsoft stuff is stupid. I mean, it is useful to make a technical comparison to decide which is the best or preferable tool for the job, but do we really need to turn this into a war? I use Linux almost exclusively at work and at home because it works for me, not because it might be a thorn in Microsoft's side."
I think this point right here is what many people have been missing. Personally, I use both Windows and Macs at home. I do enjoy using my Mac but I could really care less what percent of the desktop market Apple occupies. As long as what I use makes me happy and works for me, I could care less what others use. I think the same should apply for linux. If you think that using linux will be the best choice, then by all means, go for it! I don't really see why this needs to be a war. Just continue to develop linux and, in time, if it really is the best choice eventually people will use it more and more.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually, my iBook with similar specs to the test unit in the article is less expensive than the HP unit.
Yes, and many of the Linux comments such as yours are all the same, they speak of the "open future". Well, honestly I think that is great but I'm interested in using my computer right now. Photoshop is an amazing program and it is the standard for digital photography work. I have used Open Office and while I liked some of its features, MS Office just feels more polished. It's not just about PS or Office either, its about using the platform as a whole. For instance I own a Canon Digital Rebel which comes with some Canon software that only works on Windows and OS X. Now I'm sure I could find OSS that provides the same function, but when I want to do ditigial photography...I want to do digital photography not hunt for software on the net. To me, that is the key difference right now. Linux is great for some applications (even on the desktop for certain users) but its not great for me. Isn't that what choice is all about? Using what works for me? Also, I think the fact that the article makes it clear how shocked the author is that everything works out of the box tells how far Linux still needs to come.
Don't get me wrong, I like Linux and I think it is great that you can finally buy a Linux laptop where everything just works, but I still think it trails behind Apple. I can run Photoshop and MS Office on my iBook without any gimmicks or compromises like I would need to run them on a Linux laptop. Also, when I buy new hardware or look for a new program, there is a pretty good chance that there is support of OS X. The chance of finding mainstream items that support Linux is still very slim.
So you mean that burning sensation in the back of my skull is not from the internet melting dow...*thud*
Yes but the attack may or may not happen tomorrow. I know what the author was trying to get at here, but honestly that was a funny choice of wording. I would say that every single day the internet may or may not be attacked. Every single day the sun may or may not explode. You could say something similar for just about every circumstance.
Actually, Java can be just as fast as C or C++ code in the right situations. I think the best place for Java is on the server. Here apps run for long times and overhead doesn't have to be a huge issue. Java VMs are capable of predicting the code's branches after it has run for some time, so it seems that it can be quite efficient on a server. Also, I don't think that the cross-platform support is what would necessarily make Java "slow" since each VM can be fined tuned for the platform that it is designed for.
"Cool" stopped being important when I browsed /. for the first time.
I know that some people really can't take change when it comes to computers, but to me changing the browser has always been the easiest change. The back, foward, home, and stop buttons are almost always in the same general area and the address bar usually functions in the exact same way. The only thing that usually shows a relatively large change between the browsers is bookmarks. My family used IE for everything and one day I switched them to Firefox without mentioning anything. I was just kind of waiting to see what kind of questions I would get, but the only one I've heard so far was my mother asking if I changed the browser. They are probably indifferent as to what browser they use, but at least I know that using Firefox is better for them!
The article seems a little off in what it says. First of all, I would imagine the ability to create new techniques quckly and with the best results is one of the main selling points for CG companies. For instance, with Perfect Storm, ILM had to write the water effects program from stratch. A lot of research and development had to go into this program. I don't think this is something that ILM really wants to give away for free and it certainly wasn't something that was simple to create. Also, I think that not everything should be given to open source. Don't get me wrong, open source is great for applications that are widely spread (operating systems, browsers) but if you make all of your income off of innovative graphics for movies do you really want to give away your innovative graphic software? Also, this type of software is not the stuff that will benefit a large amount of computer users. It just isn't something that would be a huge benefit to the community as a whole.
" If every business gave away everything they built, that would be called communism. That just ain't hollywood's bag, baby.'
Didn't you pay attention in the 50/60s? Hollywood is Communist!
While many things that the Cray CTO said are true, I think the issue (obviously) has be skewed some. It really depends on the problem you are solving. Some problems will need to have data shared between all of the the nodes, but others will require that each node only has access to the data that is important to the small part of the problem that it solves. Also, the CTO mentioned that clusters don't scale very well. I don't really know what made him think this, but it seems to me that clusters do scale pretty well. For instance, ILM supposedly uses all of its employee's workstations at night to help do the daily renders. This way all of the cpus sitting on desks don't go unused during off hours.
What I have heard is that Bill Gates has said on a few occasions that if he were to get in contact with Nintendo he would immediately offer to buy them. I think Nintendo is a company that MS would like to own. In fact I think they made a bid for Nintendo and Sega when they were first creating the Xbox. At this point, it just seems like the offer is always there is Nintendo is willing to take it.
My favorite thing at the airport is the sign that tells you what you can't bring on and it has a very cartoon looking bomb on it. That should definetly keep Wiley E. Coyote off of the plane.
True, I don't think that ads should break up a show, but since ads are a fact of life, I think that after the show is over if I have to view ads they should at least be on a topic that I am interested in.
Yes, the whole fake "unlimited" deal with Comcast is kind of upsetting, luckily I have never run into that sort of problem with my internet service from them. Hopefully they will never impose that sort of thing on On Demand television, I mean the whole point is to view what you want, when you want.
I'm not so sure they necessarily meant web content as in web pages but more online resources. For example, they mention being able to pull a movie from a Netflix like website and view it whenever you please, the same could be done for other online videos or news sources. At least, this is what I hope they mean. I don't want to read any websites while watching something either. I think what really needs to happen first is for more publishers to put good content online, then devices like TiVo can make the most of it.
An interesting point that the article speaks briefly about is advertising and how advertisers hate Tivo because it can skip adds. The article mentions using Tivo's stat keeping to target a customer more directly and deliever relevant ads. I think this is really the future for advertising, not the static model of current television. For instance, I hate most adds because I'm not interested in what they are selling. I don't care if the newest Maxi pad can absorb a whole pitcher of iced tea, as a male I'm never going to need them. I often find car commercials very, very annoying, but when I was looking for a new car it was uesful to know what companies were having incentives. If ad companies could send me ads about products or television shows that I would be interested in, I think I might actually like to view them. Hopefully services like Tivo will help to bring this about.
Not everything on On Demand is pay per view. In fact, the only thing I have found so far that is PPV are movies, and even this doesn't have to be PPV, for instance, my package came with Starz for free, so whatever movies Starz is playing I can watch on On Demand for free. All of the normal television channels are free also. The only ones I have really looked at are Comedy Central and Adult Swim. You can watch whatever shows they have listed with no PPV fees. I think PPV movies mainly competes with video rentals (and that seems to be the way Comcast advertises it). You are right though, if Comcast ever did make every show PPV, I would not want to watch it, but I would really love if I could see any episode from every season of Seinfeld whenever I want, which is something that they don't do yet.
This might be a little off topic, but I think its ok since it deals with TIVO's competition. I recently had Comcast digital cable installed and have been playing around with the On Demand feature. So far it seems like a promising feature, but needs much more content. The thing I like about On Demand is, unlike TIVO, is that I can watch something that didn't necessarily air yet (although in reality almost all of the content is previously aired stuff). I think that as soon as networks start to embrace On Demand type services more, it will be a big hit, making boxes like TIVO almost obsolete. I think what they should strive for now is putting up entire old seasons of television shows. I think it would be great to be able to watch any episode of Futurama when I want and for series that are still being run, they could add the new episodes a day after they air. On Demand should shape up to be a great technology, but right now it definetly needs better content. I can't really complain seeing how it comes free with any digital cable package. However, since they do use it as a major selling point I think Comcast should work with the networks to get better grade material on it. Once they do, I will never want to use a TIVO.
Hey, it wasn't me who came up with that, it just happens to be what my technically inclined friends referred to it as.
Just looking at the Netscrape icon reminds me of my high school where they used Nutscrape 4.x (despite what you might be thinking I graduated in 2003...yes my high school sucked when it came to software). This memory alone is enough to make me want to stray away from the newest Netscape. But on a more serious note, is there anything that the Netscape release offers that Mozilla/Firefox doesn't? If there is nothing, then the only purpose that I can see to Netscape is as a possibly more comfortable way to switch people from IE. It seems to me like more people probably remember Netscape and feel comfortable with it rather than some "open source", animal toting browser that they probably have never heard of before.
How much of the total traffic on the internet is from viruses/worms looking for targets? It's not that I really worry about getting infected, but I want to get all the bandwidth I can from my cable modem and I don't need rogue computer programs making the net crappier for everyone else!
Well, according to my research Java doesn't even exist! There are absolutely no servers existing in the .java domain. However, there are many, many servers with .net. Apparently, Java has much catching up to do if they ever want to pass Microsoft.
"Linux is like a manual [transmission]..."
:)
If this is true then I have to say that OS X is like one of those spiffy manumatic transmission - you get all the control you want, but the simplicity of automatic if you wish
"I my opinion all this Linux vs. Microsoft stuff is stupid. I mean, it is useful to make a technical comparison to decide which is the best or preferable tool for the job, but do we really need to turn this into a war? I use Linux almost exclusively at work and at home because it works for me, not because it might be a thorn in Microsoft's side."
I think this point right here is what many people have been missing. Personally, I use both Windows and Macs at home. I do enjoy using my Mac but I could really care less what percent of the desktop market Apple occupies. As long as what I use makes me happy and works for me, I could care less what others use. I think the same should apply for linux. If you think that using linux will be the best choice, then by all means, go for it! I don't really see why this needs to be a war. Just continue to develop linux and, in time, if it really is the best choice eventually people will use it more and more.