This is such a ridiculous and unlikely idea. The IT industry has invested TRILLIONS of dollars in applications and drivers for Windows - not just commercial off-the-shelf but in house custom solutions - and ALL of that would be more-or-less discarded by using OSX. It's even less likely than Microsoft changing to Linux, because at least Linux has a lot of drivers already, whereas OSX has maybe 1-5% of the number of drivers available.
Sure, a Virtualisation solution is possible, but can you see anyone trying to sell an up-to 100x slowdown (where the worst is for 3D apps like games) for all existing software? Even Intel who managed "reasonable" performance with Itanium emulation of X86 suffered severely for this.
I don't know for sure, but that seems seriously unlikely. For one thing that wastes a huge amount of CPU time, and for another in practice newly allocated memory is generally full of random (actually, "left over") data, not zeroes.
Thirdly, the idea that "System Idle Process" only becomes a "hlt" instruction when on battery power is wrong, AFAIK. CPUs are normally in the HLT condition unless something is actually happening, otherwise they would waste a lot of power.
Anyway, feel free to enlighten us. Perhaps you have access to the source code or a link to tell us otherwise?
As far as I know, they aren't actually doing word processing in AJAX, ie. when you type a letter, it isn't modifying the DOM. It's just a Firefox/Mozilla HTML edit control, with a small user interface around it to choose fonts, etc.
This is exactly the same as developers who create a "Browser" by taking MSHTML control and putting a new menu and toolbar. They do perhaps 1% of the work, and the existing library object does the remaining 99% of understanding how to parse and layout HTML, fetch files by HTTP, and run Javascript.
It would be much more impressive if they actually modify the DOM for every keystroke, display their own cursor, etc.
No, they will assume - correctly - that most of these gamers will pirate XP. After all, they "only want it for games" so Microsoft doesn't really deserve any money... right?
Re:Dual boot? How about virtualization, too!
on
Going To Boot Camp
·
· Score: 1
But have you used Virtual PC or VMWare? It seems like exactly the same thing, except cheaper and available on Mac. That's interesting, but those are well established products with good performance vs this new one that is new and untested. So your post looks a lot like advertising because you fail to compare it to the obvious competition.
Unfortunately, most mail servers are not web servers. You would have to configure the mail server to have secure HTTP upload access to a web server... and which one? Many companies have a domain only for email.
It is a very good idea to start with, but would require a lot of infrastructure still.
Thunderbird/Seamonkey - right click attachment and delete. Admittedly, it took a long time and a lot of screaming (and votes) for it to happen, but the Mozilla guys finally got it.
Cutting back the term of copyright is what many people here agree on. But they also say that in their proposal, only the "exact copy" is protected - you can sample a clip and then sell it as a new work! Now, there might be a grey area, but that seems a bit on the nose. Just pass it through a Digital to analog converter, and back to digital, and you've somehow created something?
Sounds just like a PC. Trust Microsoft to nibble away at the basic nature of a product (trouble free entertainment) and turn it into something else.
I don't think it's all bad mind, but it sounds like precisely the kind of hassle (especially, the fact this is the *second* patch for some games) that I *wouldn't* want from a console.
Just putting together the (good quality) off the shelf boards wouldn't get you anywhere. You have to add some style - do some real marketing - add some (perceived) value. Then customers will pay more than they would just for a functional machine.
OK, so the issue here is that customers on limited bandwidth can't manage the receiving since POP3 is not very helpful for this. Still, assuming the user is able to receive it OK - what's the problem? All ISPs etc seem to get very upset at the idea customers would send 5 or 10MB files via email, let alone the much larger files that people want to use for video etc. And I'm not sure why, other than that "that's the way we've done it before".
Obviously, USERS find it very obvious and intuitive just to attach files to email, regardless of size. So why don't ISPs provide what their customers want?
That's true. Even though I know that in theory there is massive amounts of CPU power to render shadows or whatever, it always comes out actually seeming more sluggish. Even if it's the difference between 1/5th of a second an 1/10th of a second to redraw, it's still noticeable.
Someone should film that. Spread it round on BitTorrent and such. People would link to it everywhere because at last they have a vivid way to explain what they already vaguely feel: copying is free and we shouldn't shut it out just "because".
A bit OT, but let me play devil's advocate, and ask: Why? What is so bad about using mail to transfer arbitrarily large files - other than that current software doesn't expect it to happen and might not cope?
Yes, and if the market was working correctly Intel and AMD would now be niche players with the focus being on making PIII-500 equivalents cheaper, smaller, cooler.
It's really an example of marketing *creating* a market. Because most of the customers are relatively ignorant, they buy whatever marketing suggests is coolest.
I think that over time we will see this happen. It takes a while for the hype to die down but we are all seeing more lightweight systems for media or thin clients.
it would be great to have a company internal storage area for things that will be useful in more than one project.
You mean something crazy like... like... a shared network drive? Or a version control system?
I've seen people get excitable about these things and spend ten times as long building systems as doing useful things with them. Pick something simple and stick to it.
Just saw the first episode of the BBC series. *Much funnier*. The effects are of course *shockingly* bad, but the humor is really the point.
The only thing the movie really did well was the effects, and movies with good effects these days are just not special anymore. Granted, the actors seemed like decent choices, but none of them got the delivery right... as in funny.
We found that the DLP projectors gave much truer color, whereas the LCD units put everyone in a candy colored world
Maybe you made some poor choices in projectors, or didn't know how to set them up. LCD is usually considered to have superior colour saturation and fidelity to DLP at the same price level.
In fact the only strength of DLP these days is black level and (marginally) contrast.
Slashdot Mirror
This is such a ridiculous and unlikely idea. The IT industry has invested TRILLIONS of dollars in applications and drivers for Windows - not just commercial off-the-shelf but in house custom solutions - and ALL of that would be more-or-less discarded by using OSX. It's even less likely than Microsoft changing to Linux, because at least Linux has a lot of drivers already, whereas OSX has maybe 1-5% of the number of drivers available.
Sure, a Virtualisation solution is possible, but can you see anyone trying to sell an up-to 100x slowdown (where the worst is for 3D apps like games) for all existing software? Even Intel who managed "reasonable" performance with Itanium emulation of X86 suffered severely for this.
I don't know for sure, but that seems seriously unlikely. For one thing that wastes a huge amount of CPU time, and for another in practice newly allocated memory is generally full of random (actually, "left over") data, not zeroes.
Thirdly, the idea that "System Idle Process" only becomes a "hlt" instruction when on battery power is wrong, AFAIK. CPUs are normally in the HLT condition unless something is actually happening, otherwise they would waste a lot of power.
Anyway, feel free to enlighten us. Perhaps you have access to the source code or a link to tell us otherwise?
GP is saying that client side applications should be written native, NOT as web applications.
OK, I could be wrong, but ...
As far as I know, they aren't actually doing word processing in AJAX, ie. when you type a letter, it isn't modifying the DOM. It's just a Firefox/Mozilla HTML edit control, with a small user interface around it to choose fonts, etc.
This is exactly the same as developers who create a "Browser" by taking MSHTML control and putting a new menu and toolbar. They do perhaps 1% of the work, and the existing library object does the remaining 99% of understanding how to parse and layout HTML, fetch files by HTTP, and run Javascript.
It would be much more impressive if they actually modify the DOM for every keystroke, display their own cursor, etc.
No, they will assume - correctly - that most of these gamers will pirate XP. After all, they "only want it for games" so Microsoft doesn't really deserve any money... right?
But have you used Virtual PC or VMWare? It seems like exactly the same thing, except cheaper and available on Mac. That's interesting, but those are well established products with good performance vs this new one that is new and untested. So your post looks a lot like advertising because you fail to compare it to the obvious competition.
Unfortunately, most mail servers are not web servers. You would have to configure the mail server to have secure HTTP upload access to a web server ... and which one? Many companies have a domain only for email.
It is a very good idea to start with, but would require a lot of infrastructure still.
Thunderbird/Seamonkey - right click attachment and delete.
Admittedly, it took a long time and a lot of screaming (and votes) for it to happen, but the Mozilla guys finally got it.
So: "god moves in mysterious ways". The standard way to avoid having to answer.
Cutting back the term of copyright is what many people here agree on.
But they also say that in their proposal, only the "exact copy" is protected - you can sample a clip and then sell it as a new work! Now, there might be a grey area, but that seems a bit on the nose. Just pass it through a Digital to analog converter, and back to digital, and you've somehow created something?
Yes, but the problem is that using the English language to interpret it suggests the OPPOSITE meaning.
Every time I see people write "I could care less" I *do* read it as "I care about this". The opposite of what they probably mean.
Sounds just like a PC.
Trust Microsoft to nibble away at the basic nature of a product (trouble free entertainment) and turn it into something else.
I don't think it's all bad mind, but it sounds like precisely the kind of hassle (especially, the fact this is the *second* patch for some games) that I *wouldn't* want from a console.
Just putting together the (good quality) off the shelf boards wouldn't get you anywhere. You have to add some style - do some real marketing - add some (perceived) value. Then customers will pay more than they would just for a functional machine.
OK, so the issue here is that customers on limited bandwidth can't manage the receiving since POP3 is not very helpful for this.
Still, assuming the user is able to receive it OK - what's the problem? All ISPs etc seem to get very upset at the idea customers would send 5 or 10MB files via email, let alone the much larger files that people want to use for video etc. And I'm not sure why, other than that "that's the way we've done it before".
Obviously, USERS find it very obvious and intuitive just to attach files to email, regardless of size. So why don't ISPs provide what their customers want?
That's true. Even though I know that in theory there is massive amounts of CPU power to render shadows or whatever, it always comes out actually seeming more sluggish. Even if it's the difference between 1/5th of a second an 1/10th of a second to redraw, it's still noticeable.
Except of course for that minor thing of allowing font scaling and wrapping to suit the size of the screen.
PDF is great when you want to send an exact representation of a printable document online. It's quite annoying for actually READING online.
Someone should film that. Spread it round on BitTorrent and such. People would link to it everywhere because at last they have a vivid way to explain what they already vaguely feel: copying is free and we shouldn't shut it out just "because".
That's the law. Like it or not
Irrelevant. You've missed the point. We are talking about whether the current law is right, not what it is.
A bit OT, but let me play devil's advocate, and ask: Why? What is so bad about using mail to transfer arbitrarily large files - other than that current software doesn't expect it to happen and might not cope?
Yes, and if the market was working correctly Intel and AMD would now be niche players with the focus being on making PIII-500 equivalents cheaper, smaller, cooler.
It's really an example of marketing *creating* a market. Because most of the customers are relatively ignorant, they buy whatever marketing suggests is coolest.
I think that over time we will see this happen. It takes a while for the hype to die down but we are all seeing more lightweight systems for media or thin clients.
it would be great to have a company internal storage area for things that will be useful in more than one project.
... a shared network drive? Or a version control system?
You mean something crazy like... like
I've seen people get excitable about these things and spend ten times as long building systems as doing useful things with them. Pick something simple and stick to it.
\\myserver\libraries\libraryA\version\...
That wouldn't be the *motor* that's locking up then, would it?
Sorry to bother you Mattygfunk, but you could please use your signature for advertising, not paste it into the article. Thanks.
Just saw the first episode of the BBC series. *Much funnier*. The effects are of course *shockingly* bad, but the humor is really the point.
... as in funny.
The only thing the movie really did well was the effects, and movies with good effects these days are just not special anymore. Granted, the actors seemed like decent choices, but none of them got the delivery right
We found that the DLP projectors gave much truer color, whereas the LCD units put everyone in a candy colored world
Maybe you made some poor choices in projectors, or didn't know how to set them up. LCD is usually considered to have superior colour saturation and fidelity to DLP at the same price level.
In fact the only strength of DLP these days is black level and (marginally) contrast.