You make an excellent point here. However, i would like to point out that not all "made for win98" stuff actually works that well with windows at all;)
I was commenting that Mac OS X on x86 wouldn't be nice on most white box PC's that already exist because of the unpredictability of the hardware in them, but if you were building one from scratch, no worries:)
did i SAY they controlled the architecture? no..
they control the other hardware, like video and sound cards, eth controllers, etc...on an intel PC this stuff is usually a lot less predictable, so Mac OS X on a beige box Intel PC would not be as nice as it is on a Mac.
I wasn't talking about Apple using Intel processors.
The reason mac stuff is so nice is that mac knows the hardware that goes into it. Apple controls the computers that run OS X so it always runs flawlessly. Intel hardware is too unpredictable for this type of thing.
Also, most people consider an OS a "house", they use it and live in it for years until they have a reason to move. it's an immobile part of their computer. People like you and me switch OS's like socks, but most ppl use the same OS, same INSTALLATION of the os, for years.
my parents have been using the same install of win98 on their pII 450 since...well..98.
in short, nobody will go for a demo OS unless they're a hacker, and nobody will like MacOS if it runs on intel stuff.
YDL does fill an important niche, and i support Linux on all platforms, especially PPC.
However, i don't think i'd be willing to give up OS X for Linux on my brand-spankin-new ibook. I'd run OS X on my intel boxes if i could! It's an awesome OS that impresses me every time i sit down in front of it.
Older PPC hardware, YDL rocks... but don't replace OS X with it.
You must be thinking of the Old-School candy-colored iBooks. I have one of the new all-white G3 800 iBooks, and everyone thinks it's really nice looking, and very elegant. OSX is damn sweet, too. You really should look into one. Here is a good little blurb of info on them.
I mean really, you should think different:P
Oh, wait, you refuse to get IN ibook...i agree there, it looks kinda cramped inside as the CPU part is only an inch or so thick.
pfffftttt. you obviously didn't know that 20 different tier 1 & 2 notebook retailers are supplied with their notebooks by just four MANUFACTURERS.
these 4 MANUFACTURERS (names you probably never heard of) make notebooks for EVERYONE.
four MANUFACTURERS? or FOUR manufacturers?
I think you put the wrong emPHASis on the wrong sylLABle.
A Cluster on 56k makes little sense... but a distributed net of computers on 56k does.
Clustering is multiple computers working together in real time.
Distributed computing is where the computers crunch numbers independently then send back the results, which are batch-compled later instead of being compiled real-time.
As for supersonic bullets, almost all guns fire supersonic rounds, pistols included. That's why gunshots are so loud, because of the sonic boom.
i'm afraid you're mistaken.
almost no pistols fire supersonic rounds, not even super powerful ones like the.44 magnum,.454 cassull, or.50 AE. THe only pistols that actually do fire supersonic rounds that i know of are ones that take cartridges designed for rifles, like.218 bee and.22 hornet. and many rifles such as the.45-70 don't fire supersonic bullets (most of these are calibers and chamberings left over from the 1800's, almost all modern rifles (8mm mauser,.30-06,.300 win. mag) do fire supersonic bullets, unless the rifle fires pistol ammo like a lever action.45 Colt or a 9mm carbine. I even remember reading that some assault rifles like the AK-47 with its 7.62x39 are subsonic, but this i really am not sure without checking.) If you don't believe me i'll look up some ballistics charts from my reloading supplies.
I don't claim to know exactly how a silencer works, but i'm dead sure it doesn't slow the bullet down.
I do agree that a laser would be more accurate, but as far as the "instant death" thing, the bullet serves its purpose. I don't doubt you could get a laser that packs enough power to bore through someone's head very quickly, but such a laser could never be as mobile as a sniper rifle, not even a big one like the Maadi-Griffin.50 BMG.
and as far as a window is concerned, if it looks to the shooter like the laser will hit through the window, it will, because the light used to aim the weapon is being refracted just as much and in the same direction as the weapon itself. This is especially true if the aiming is done by a red-dot laser.
Not only is it still in use, it's slated to stay in service for another 50 years or so.
now THAT's a good design. some of these things will be 100 years old when they finally get mothballed.
I say this more for my own edification than for yours.
DOS is pretty useless, whereas Unix in one form or another is still a huge force and extremely useful.
I have an old rotary phone sitting right here. Makes outbound and accepts inbound calls just fine. Make sure when you buy one that it has an RJ-11 plug on the end of its cord, and you're fine.
Even if rotary dialing isn't supported in your area, you can still pick up.
There is so much wrong with this...where do i begin?
first of all, it can't vaporize a whole city, it can't turn people into mush at a whim. it's not a weapon of mass destruction. HELL, it's not even meant to be pointed at the GROUND!! it's meant to intercept missiles, possibly ICBM, but more likely medium-range strategic missiles (think SCUD here.)
IT does this by heating the fuel inside the missile. it's a giant match.
it doesn't have a 300-mile footprint. It probably has a footprint about the size of a quarter. SO to kill those hundreds of enemy troops, you have to pinpoint them all, one by one.
There is something that does what you say, though. It's called a nuke.
And the USA, Russia, and most of europe and Asia already have them. And not a single one has ever been used in anger since the 2 were dropped on japan. Why? Mutually Assured Destruction. As surely as we'd kill our enemy, they'd kill us at the same time. THe birds would pass each other in the air.
So, in other words, both sides DO have such powerful weapons, and as a result, they have NEVER been used.
Besides, having a good defense prevents us from having any problems if someone decides they don't like us. Would you rather we have no way to defend ourselves?
it's not an instrument created from our obsession with our own destruction...it's an instrument designed to save thousands, if not millions of lives.
A laser would only really cause burns, what you need is a bullet of some sort to kill them instantly...
and speaking of which, many sniper guns fire supersonic bullets, meaning the bullet kills the terrorist/criminal before the criminal can even hear the shot. Wasnt that the point of the laser?
IT would have to be so perfectly reflective that such things do not exist yet.
even really really efficient mirrors are toast when having high-powered lasers blasted at them.
Mirroring the outside would likely work for about.001 seconds.
Shrink the lasers a bit, or use solid state lasers, and replace "superjumbo sized jet" with "SR-71 Blackbird".
NOW we're talkin! even if all 3 lasers fail, it can get the hell out of there at mach 3!
The laser shouldn't do anything to the air, as CO2 infrared lasers don't cause any weird air effects. THe diffraction shouldn't be a huge problem either. As far as missing, i think the computer control can handle that, and as the other poster noted, a focal point system may be implimented. And as far as a ground based laser pointed at the 747, when the 747 fires, both it AND the missile are above the cloud bank, so it's unlikely the ground based systems could draw a bead on it..
even if they could, how could they tell it was a laser-toting 747, or an innocent airliner?
Great! Now I can get a second-rate, first generation 10KRPM hard drive with bad server performance and almost no capacity, from a company that disavowed the high end years ago by bailing on the SCSI market, all for the same price as established SCSI drives of the same size or established ATA drives four times the size.
That being said, it's almost impossible to resist the urge to put WinXP home on it.
Re:Who needs a "Palm" device of ANY kind?
on
Palm PDA Roundup
·
· Score: 1
Here Here!
My zaurus serves me far better than pen/paper and my notebook (which i'm using now) ever could. I love my laptop, but it's just not as portable as a handheld. I couldn't take it into, say, the Norwegian parliament;)
Re:Zire is the only one that make sense
on
Palm PDA Roundup
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Time for a night on the town! I need my geekcessories!
Let me get my zire, my cell phone, my mp3 player, my voice recorder, my game boy with its seven cartridges, my gps, my digital camera...
oh my. Now i know why they invented cargo pants...
mp3 player? got it. Camera? got it. Memory? got it. Nice color display? got it...
Good price...uh...*raises finger, then drops arms and bows head*
Get a Zaurus, it's about half the price.
Re:Palm is a sinking ship
on
Palm PDA Roundup
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
I am forced to disagree. Palm's machines, either by OS or by the system itself, are little more than the cheap $30 databanks you see in the stationary section of a store compared to a modern pocket PC. Every time someone refers to my Zaurus SL-5500 as a "Palm Pilot" i cringe and tell them to renounce their blasphemy.
The Zaurus's organizer's functions are excellent, and i cannot imagine them being any better. The input ease from the slide-away KB or onscreen KB is excellent, and i have no complaints.
It's powerful, and flexible. I could code and compile C programs, write HTML pages, or do any number of things on it if i wanted to. I could even edit images! It's got internal storage to spare, and like Palm or Handspring, doesn't need sync software or proprietary memory to work. (indeed, i've had it for months and have never synched it with another system...i just transfer things via CF or the wireless eth card.) It may have been $400, but it's well worth it. It's a real computer, just like my compaq laptop, my dual Athlon 2100+ workstation, my suns, apples, SGI, and my other x86's. It runs real linux! This also helps it cope with the instability problem the previous author was talking about. I've never had to reset my zaurus, EVER.
It's a delight, and superior in every way to any palm. Even its organizer functions are awesome, especially considering i never have to worry about synching it, and i can connect to the web with full color and view real web pages, chat on IRC, and even download files with Qtella.
Zaurus, and other PocketPC's, particularly the Linux ones, are the best handhelds out there. Better than WinCE Ipaq/Journada/Axiom/Toshiba systems, better than Palm and Clie, just plain better.
AND they fit nicely in your pocket, backpack, briefcase, or laptop tote.
Slashdot Mirror
You make an excellent point here. However, i would like to point out that not all "made for win98" stuff actually works that well with windows at all ;)
:)
I was commenting that Mac OS X on x86 wouldn't be nice on most white box PC's that already exist because of the unpredictability of the hardware in them, but if you were building one from scratch, no worries
did i SAY they controlled the architecture? no.. they control the other hardware, like video and sound cards, eth controllers, etc...on an intel PC this stuff is usually a lot less predictable, so Mac OS X on a beige box Intel PC would not be as nice as it is on a Mac. I wasn't talking about Apple using Intel processors.
are you actually saying Taco has been doing us a favor all this time?
This couldn't work...
The reason mac stuff is so nice is that mac knows the hardware that goes into it. Apple controls the computers that run OS X so it always runs flawlessly. Intel hardware is too unpredictable for this type of thing.
Also, most people consider an OS a "house", they use it and live in it for years until they have a reason to move. it's an immobile part of their computer. People like you and me switch OS's like socks, but most ppl use the same OS, same INSTALLATION of the os, for years.
my parents have been using the same install of win98 on their pII 450 since...well..98.
in short, nobody will go for a demo OS unless they're a hacker, and nobody will like MacOS if it runs on intel stuff.
Typed from a G3 800 ibook.
YDL does fill an important niche, and i support Linux on all platforms, especially PPC.
However, i don't think i'd be willing to give up OS X for Linux on my brand-spankin-new ibook. I'd run OS X on my intel boxes if i could! It's an awesome OS that impresses me every time i sit down in front of it.
Older PPC hardware, YDL rocks... but don't replace OS X with it.
You must be thinking of the Old-School candy-colored iBooks. I have one of the new all-white G3 800 iBooks, and everyone thinks it's really nice looking, and very elegant. OSX is damn sweet, too. You really should look into one. Here is a good little blurb of info on them.
:P
I mean really, you should think different
Oh, wait, you refuse to get IN ibook...i agree there, it looks kinda cramped inside as the CPU part is only an inch or so thick.
I think the site you wanted is here.
Same here. AMD K6-2, 475 MHz, Presario 1200 XL110, purchased in summer 2000. I'm typing on it right now. It runs like a dream.
pfffftttt. you obviously didn't know that 20 different tier 1 & 2 notebook retailers are supplied with their notebooks by just four MANUFACTURERS.
these 4 MANUFACTURERS (names you probably never heard of) make notebooks for EVERYONE. four MANUFACTURERS? or FOUR manufacturers? I think you put the wrong emPHASis on the wrong sylLABle.
What about the Centrino processors released last night? 1.6GHz performing equal to that of a 2.6GHz P4?
Wow! That's almost nearly sort of as good as the efficiency of PowerPC chips!
and as far as AMD being one-up on intel..when is intel's x86-64 chip coming?
oh, that's right...never...
A Cluster on 56k makes little sense...
but a distributed net of computers on 56k does.
Clustering is multiple computers working together in real time.
Distributed computing is where the computers crunch numbers independently then send back the results, which are batch-compled later instead of being compiled real-time.
As for supersonic bullets, almost all guns fire supersonic rounds, pistols included. That's why gunshots are so loud, because of the sonic boom.
.44 magnum, .454 cassull, or .50 AE. THe only pistols that actually do fire supersonic rounds that i know of are ones that take cartridges designed for rifles, like .218 bee and .22 hornet. and many rifles such as the .45-70 don't fire supersonic bullets (most of these are calibers and chamberings left over from the 1800's, almost all modern rifles (8mm mauser, .30-06,.300 win. mag) do fire supersonic bullets, unless the rifle fires pistol ammo like a lever action .45 Colt or a 9mm carbine. I even remember reading that some assault rifles like the AK-47 with its 7.62x39 are subsonic, but this i really am not sure without checking.) If you don't believe me i'll look up some ballistics charts from my reloading supplies.
.50 BMG.
i'm afraid you're mistaken.
almost no pistols fire supersonic rounds, not even super powerful ones like the
I don't claim to know exactly how a silencer works, but i'm dead sure it doesn't slow the bullet down.
I do agree that a laser would be more accurate, but as far as the "instant death" thing, the bullet serves its purpose. I don't doubt you could get a laser that packs enough power to bore through someone's head very quickly, but such a laser could never be as mobile as a sniper rifle, not even a big one like the Maadi-Griffin
and as far as a window is concerned, if it looks to the shooter like the laser will hit through the window, it will, because the light used to aim the weapon is being refracted just as much and in the same direction as the weapon itself. This is especially true if the aiming is done by a red-dot laser.
Not only is it still in use, it's slated to stay in service for another 50 years or so. now THAT's a good design. some of these things will be 100 years old when they finally get mothballed.
I say this more for my own edification than for yours. DOS is pretty useless, whereas Unix in one form or another is still a huge force and extremely useful.
I have an old rotary phone sitting right here. Makes outbound and accepts inbound calls just fine. Make sure when you buy one that it has an RJ-11 plug on the end of its cord, and you're fine.
Even if rotary dialing isn't supported in your area, you can still pick up.
the best part..$8.00 on Ebay.
There is so much wrong with this...where do i begin?
first of all, it can't vaporize a whole city, it can't turn people into mush at a whim. it's not a weapon of mass destruction. HELL, it's not even meant to be pointed at the GROUND!! it's meant to intercept missiles, possibly ICBM, but more likely medium-range strategic missiles (think SCUD here.)
IT does this by heating the fuel inside the missile. it's a giant match.
it doesn't have a 300-mile footprint. It probably has a footprint about the size of a quarter. SO to kill those hundreds of enemy troops, you have to pinpoint them all, one by one.
There is something that does what you say, though. It's called a nuke.
And the USA, Russia, and most of europe and Asia already have them. And not a single one has ever been used in anger since the 2 were dropped on japan. Why? Mutually Assured Destruction. As surely as we'd kill our enemy, they'd kill us at the same time. THe birds would pass each other in the air.
So, in other words, both sides DO have such powerful weapons, and as a result, they have NEVER been used.
Besides, having a good defense prevents us from having any problems if someone decides they don't like us. Would you rather we have no way to defend ourselves?
it's not an instrument created from our obsession with our own destruction...it's an instrument designed to save thousands, if not millions of lives.
A laser would only really cause burns, what you need is a bullet of some sort to kill them instantly... and speaking of which, many sniper guns fire supersonic bullets, meaning the bullet kills the terrorist/criminal before the criminal can even hear the shot. Wasnt that the point of the laser?
IT would have to be so perfectly reflective that such things do not exist yet. even really really efficient mirrors are toast when having high-powered lasers blasted at them. Mirroring the outside would likely work for about .001 seconds.
Shrink the lasers a bit, or use solid state lasers, and replace "superjumbo sized jet" with "SR-71 Blackbird". NOW we're talkin! even if all 3 lasers fail, it can get the hell out of there at mach 3!
The laser shouldn't do anything to the air, as CO2 infrared lasers don't cause any weird air effects. THe diffraction shouldn't be a huge problem either. As far as missing, i think the computer control can handle that, and as the other poster noted, a focal point system may be implimented. And as far as a ground based laser pointed at the 747, when the 747 fires, both it AND the missile are above the cloud bank, so it's unlikely the ground based systems could draw a bead on it.. even if they could, how could they tell it was a laser-toting 747, or an innocent airliner?
Great! Now I can get a second-rate, first generation 10KRPM hard drive with bad server performance and almost no capacity, from a company that disavowed the high end years ago by bailing on the SCSI market, all for the same price as established SCSI drives of the same size or established ATA drives four times the size.
That being said, it's almost impossible to resist the urge to put WinXP home on it.
Here Here!
;)
My zaurus serves me far better than pen/paper and my notebook (which i'm using now) ever could. I love my laptop, but it's just not as portable as a handheld. I couldn't take it into, say, the Norwegian parliament
Time for a night on the town! I need my geekcessories! Let me get my zire, my cell phone, my mp3 player, my voice recorder, my game boy with its seven cartridges, my gps, my digital camera... oh my. Now i know why they invented cargo pants...
mp3 player? got it. Camera? got it. Memory? got it. Nice color display? got it... Good price...uh...*raises finger, then drops arms and bows head* Get a Zaurus, it's about half the price.
I am forced to disagree. Palm's machines, either by OS or by the system itself, are little more than the cheap $30 databanks you see in the stationary section of a store compared to a modern pocket PC. Every time someone refers to my Zaurus SL-5500 as a "Palm Pilot" i cringe and tell them to renounce their blasphemy. The Zaurus's organizer's functions are excellent, and i cannot imagine them being any better. The input ease from the slide-away KB or onscreen KB is excellent, and i have no complaints. It's powerful, and flexible. I could code and compile C programs, write HTML pages, or do any number of things on it if i wanted to. I could even edit images! It's got internal storage to spare, and like Palm or Handspring, doesn't need sync software or proprietary memory to work. (indeed, i've had it for months and have never synched it with another system...i just transfer things via CF or the wireless eth card.) It may have been $400, but it's well worth it. It's a real computer, just like my compaq laptop, my dual Athlon 2100+ workstation, my suns, apples, SGI, and my other x86's. It runs real linux! This also helps it cope with the instability problem the previous author was talking about. I've never had to reset my zaurus, EVER. It's a delight, and superior in every way to any palm. Even its organizer functions are awesome, especially considering i never have to worry about synching it, and i can connect to the web with full color and view real web pages, chat on IRC, and even download files with Qtella. Zaurus, and other PocketPC's, particularly the Linux ones, are the best handhelds out there. Better than WinCE Ipaq/Journada/Axiom/Toshiba systems, better than Palm and Clie, just plain better. AND they fit nicely in your pocket, backpack, briefcase, or laptop tote.