Personally, i'm with the bloke who noted that he never really feels any sense of achievement from these games. My problems with subscription-based gameplay aside, i've just never felt any particular pull towards most online games.
Puzzles and all are great, but for me, it's the underlying story that grabs me. If there's no story, but the gameplay is great, I just give it up. It's reasons like this that even amongst FPS games, I prefer those with some kind of driving *reason*, ala System Shock 2 or Half-Life.
For myself, and hopefully others, the benefit of these games should be the active updates and evolution of the game itself. Instead, i've found that it usually turns into chatting and clustering together to fight monsters and gain experience. Until there's some kind of ever-evolving, adaptive storyline and game world, I guess I just don't get the appeal. I mean, why shell out cash each month to talk to people and fight mindless, repetitive battles? It'd be like Final Fantasy with an endless number of random encounters and no actual storyline or character depth.
So, i'm curious... anyone know of any half-decent online games that suit what i'm looking for without killing my bank account?
I work at a call center for a bank, providing customer service for home equity customers. Each and every day, I am berated, belittled, and dehumanized by people who seem to think that because I work as a representative for a company, I deserve to be their personal punching bag.
My breaks are scheduled to a specific time and I cannot deviate from them. If I come in 1 minute late, everyone notices. If I need to go to the bathroom, I can't just get up and go, I have to ask someone or wait until I have a break. The list goes on. I spend my day as a slave, and come home bitter and resentful most nights. Unfortunately, it's virtually thing only thing I can do that pays enough to take care of the bills and still have "fun money" left over.
Appreciate what you've got, man. You could be doing a LOT worse.
Ximian pops up looking like Outlook. The overall layout looks like Windows. Ad nauseum. Once again, someone is scraping together a Linux distro, trying to make it look like Windows, and giving us absolutely jack in terms of innovation, *better* usability, or creativity. Trying to accomodate Windows users by giving them a similar interface, but branding it Linux, is just plain foolish.
Make a product that's better than Windows on *all* counts, is bundled with custom-written applications instead of tweaked versions of existing ones, and then i'll raise an eyebrow.
I don't think Windows is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but let's acknowledge the faults of the alternatives. There are dozens upon dozens of Linux distributions, and so far, i've seen virtually *nothing* worth noting from an interface perspective. We brand everything as being intended for this and that audience, this and that purpose, whatever emphasis..but with the exception of some underlying framework, isn't this just a essentially a rehash of what dozens have done before?
I'm sure this will get more than few people stepping up to proclaim the vast differences between their distro of choice, but please save it. "Debian uses apt!", "Gentoo uses portage and is intended for..!" meh. They're both Linux, they both lend the capacity to do whatever the hell you want, and they can both be made to run the exact same applications...which, really, is what the average end user cares about, above all.
The average user is going to take one look at this stuff and go, "Ok, so if it looks like Windows, but doesn't run all the apps I need, why bother?"
The populace may not like it, but i'd bet that it would happen regardless. We're all up-in-arms about the RIAA, but a large percentage of people *still* continue to buy popular music and support those assholes. We grumble over gas prices, but we still purchase SUV's that guzzle the stuff like it's going out of style.
Once people are convinced they need/want something, they'll continue to satiate that need, regardless of who hands it out to them.
So is yours. You're essentially comparing apples and oranges.
Let's take this for example:
I played the flute for many years. Due to similar fingerings on the saxophone, clarinet, oboe, and piccolo, I could technically pick up any one of them and know the notes. However, when you get down to the grit of things, there are variances which make it more difficult than just picking up the instrument and displaying the kind of proficiency I have with a flute. Things such as breath control, positioning of the mouth, the differences between an embouchure and a reed, size and weight, positioning of the keys along the instrument, intonation, and so on and so forth.
3D modeling applications, audio sequencers, and programs which posess a greater scope of functions than say, an email program, are not all created equal simply because they have the same basic function. There are always similarities, but each one has specific ways of doing something which the user must adapt to, practice, and condition themselves into comfortably using. Having prior knowledge of an existing application, let's say XSI or Maya, and then sitting down with Blender, would certainly lend the user a general idea of where to start..However, there will still be those initial growing pains as the user accomodates to it. This is generally accepted even with email clients, as configuration options and features generally differ from one program to another.
I'm not going to argue whether or not Blender's UI is good or bad, but when using 3D programs, you've got to expect a degree of complexity and some bad UI decisions. As others have noted, this is bound to happen, simply because of the massive capabilities of virtually any 3D program.
I'd just like to find an excuse not to have to tuck my shirt in. There's nothing worse than constantly being aware of the fact that if you suddenly get an erection or need to "readjust", anyone looking at you will notice a sudden shift in your pants.
Long sleeve shirts? I like to think of them as crotch guards.
Technically, you can. Using simple programs like Soundforge, we've slowly started recording our vinyl to ogg. It's not as fast or generally convenient as ripping a CD, but it works.
Exactly...and just as you have the freedom *not* to use a closed-source driver, you also have the freedom to take advantage of it.
Too often, I see people confusing freedom with politics. Though they sometimes collide, they are *not* the same thing.
Personally, I don't give a crap whether or not the drivers are closed-source. If I ever put the cash down on a 3DLabs card, i'd be a lot more interested in being able to use it on my OS of choice. The freedom to do high-end 3D or video work on Linux as opposed to Windows is a lot more interesting to me than the ability to modify the source code of the drivers.
So here's a hint: Stop buying music from labels affiliated with the RIAA, sit down for a couple hours, and search out some independent artists and labels who aren't just more of the same recycled garbage.
*I* dictate the music I listen to. If the RIAA is forcing you to buy their junk, that's your problem for being a victim of marketing ploys.
I stopped supporting the RIAA and popular music nearly a decade ago. So what's your problem?
This list could go on forever...I happen to listen to a more electronic and noisy variety of music, so many (all?) of these labels may not appeal to you, but that isn't the point. It doesn't matter what kind of music you like, there are literally *thousands* of alternatives out there open for exploration.
Thing is, i'm not sure Plextor's intended audience for this drive is the typical "pass a disc around" sort of use. It seems to me that it's more viable, in general, as a more effctive form of backing things up for home users and the like who can't/won't shell out for a tape drive or external drive.
For someone like myself, this is fantastic. For everyone else? Well, use what works. That's all we can really do.
I'd also add that while I agree that standards are important, complaining obviously isn't doing the trick..so maybe you *should* start taking the time to QA media, so you don't waste even more time hunting around for a system that will work with your odd CD-R's.
It's that technology is advancing incorrectly. We're being given products that do little beyond bridging a gap between the first and the last, so to speak. I'm talking about taking longer to release products, but releasing more innovative and necessary products when you *do* release something.
Maybe i'm not thinking realistically, but i'm fond of the idea of products that last, and products that truly deliver. Monitors with ghosting images and cd-r drives that fail after less than 2 years isn't what I call good business; it's what I call being swindled.
I'll give Tom's Hardware some credit for mentioning a few key points, but I also think they missed one very key issue.
What does 'save hardware' really indicate?
From the slant of the writeup, they're assuming that this means the creation of software that will spur revolutionary, fast-paced hardware development. In part, this is accurate, as these companies do need to release products on a fairly consistent basis if they want to stay in business....but there are a few things missing here. Namely reliability and focused innovation.
How often do we hear about or experience first-hand hardware failure? Weird driver bugs on video cards, hard drives that have to be RMA'ed after 3 months to a year, heat dissipation issues, the list goes on. Undoubtedly, things have become much more advanced since the days of the 486, but on the same token, we're also being introduced to a different set of problems. The technology is largely the same; it's just a new set of boundaries and guidelines.
The manufacturers are pumping out products every goddamned month, mostly introducing only minimal changes from product to product. I'm sorry, but this just isn't realistic.. the average buyer doesn't shell out cash for a new video card or whatever every goddamned month. When the time comes to upgrade, we want it to be a worthwhile one.. not just a $300+ clock-speed increase or an even more ridiculously huge heatsink added.
I think if the hardware industry needs saving, it's going to take a change in how things are done. From a user standpoint, at least, i'd like to see a greater emphasis on *quality* for once. There are very few companies I have genuine, lasting faith in. Everyone's in such a mad rush to be first, to hit the best benchmarks on the goddamned review sites, that they're making quality a secondary focus to just releasing something. I see it in software, I see it in hardware, and it's simply ridiculous.
Take this, for example: A quick search on Pricewatch for 'Nvidia 5800' gives the lowest price at $268.00. Not too bad for a decent video card; worth it if you need it. Then I check for Nvidia 5900, which has only recently been released.
The price suddenly shoots up to $401.99. I can almost guarantee that in a month or two, it'll be nearly the same price as the 5800. You're getting only a marginal performance increase for nearly twice the price. If you opt for the 5800, you're getting sub-par performance when you could've waited a couple months for the 5900, spent the same as the 5800 would've cost, and gotten better performance. In another year, or less, they'll release *yet another* product.
So here's my question..no, my challenge.
Knock this shit off. Instead of releasing 2 or 3 or 4 products of the same type in a year or two, why not release one or two? Focus on ultra-quality performance and product, don't compromise on parts and manufacturing, and let the market ride the wave for awhile. These guys are surprised that sales are down when they've helped instill a stigma of "save your cash. our current product will be obsolete in a week!" They're going for maximum price, crossing their fingers that they'll sell a bunch before they move onto the next release on their roadmap.
The other issue is where these guys are focusing their efforts. You can clock shit up as much as you like, but shitty build quality coupled with a lack of genuine innovation is getting us nowhere. 3D animators/compositors/etc, digital video editors, gamers, etc. all *want* high performance, no doubt. So does the home user, if only to avoid the dreaded click-and-lag demon. But how long can they keep cranking speeds before they realize that there are more important things to consider?
For instance, we've got DDR-II slowly trickling in, mostly on video cards. Why frickin' bother? Where's the goddamned MRAM? Where's our truly solid state hard drives? Why aren't we developing cooling solutions that don't involve water or noisy fans
I don't see this as too surprising..most people think that by installing ZoneAlarm and buying a Linksys router, they're immune to any form of attack or subversion. This extends to both wireless and traditional setups.
As I see it, there are two very fundamental reasons for this: lack of awareness and lack of comprehension. The average day-to-day user doesn't even know what a firewall is..what are the chances that they'll have a clue about encryption? I mean, c'mon..we're living in a world of users who largely think that SSL means that they're safe as can be, that security is something you purchase, and the only difference between wireless and a traditional connection is a lack of cables.
Awhile back, I was going on a pretty big BSD advocacy kick..y'know what finally made me give it up and shut my mouth? One girl had a bunch of questions, so I tried to answer them as best I can. I also wanted to make sure that I made clear the differences between Windows and BSD, as most MS users aren't accustomed to the file system, configuration, etc. So, naturally, I bring up firewalls, and how you essentially write your own rules for it by hand (in this particular instance, I was covering ipfw).
Rather than take my advice, she immediately became defensive, ranting off about how she's not some AOL kid, and how she already has ZoneAlarm, so she won't need to worry about a firewall on BSD. I could go on and on with stories like this.
I realize that this isn't just about wireless, but I don't think the issue is that limited in scope. Computer security is taboo to a lot of people, and unfortunately, it's a problem that needs to be addressed...or taken advantage of by those with a greater sense of what the fuck is up.
You may not be able to use sound very effectively as a pulverizing weapon, at least not in the sense that the parent post has mentioned..but, it is quite possible to cause physical discomfort, as you've noted.
Generally, I experience this more frequently when hearing things with a very low frequency response being played at a very high volume. There's a power electronics act from Italy called CazzoDio that put out a cd called "Il Tempo Della Locusta" a few years ago..the first time I listened to it, I turned the volume up pretty high. Within mere minutes, I could actually feel my stomach churning as a result of the low-end frequencies. I had a similar reaction when listening to Brighter Death Now at high volumes. On the flipside, British act Whitehouse has been known to have a more grating/piercing effect on the brain, as their sound is almost entirely based upon utilizing white noise and idiosynchratic screaming.
Regardless of our various tastes, it's definitely an interesting form for music to take.
More to the point, though, imagine this kind of sound being generated at even lower frequencies, and within an environment that doesn't have the restrictions on sound that my apartment does. I'd imagine that at just the right frequency, this could be utilized as weapon of sorts. On one of the mailing lists i'm on, I seem to recall us having a discussion a couple years ago about a particular frequency (-45dB maybe? bleh, I don't recall) being noted as literally "shit-inducing".
I'm sure we can all draw a nice mental image from that one..point is, if we can induce someone to take a spontaneous dump in their pants using nothing but sound, I don't see it as all that science-fiction to consider that we could kill a person with it or destroy a building. The trick, I think, would be focusing that sound so that it wouldn't extend beyond the object targeted.
This also doesn't take into account the number of "power users" building their own systems..nor could it, since there's no real way to tell whether or not someone is building a completely new system or upgrading an existing one.
It also fails to mention the number of people buying both laptops *and* retail PCs.
I don't put much stock in statistics anyway, but I do kind of wonder where this Baker guy gets some of his figures from. Since when does your average LCD cost only $250 more than your average CRT? Personally, i'm a little confused as to why this is even put up as news.
"Attention! Experts say small computers are more appealing to the average user becuase they're compact and nicer to look at than big clunky fucking ones!"
My preference for the last year or two has been Sylpheed. However, if you're restricted to Windows, I can say that I had a very good experience with Thunderbird, and so far, haven't found any reason not to continue using it. Even in such an infant stage of development, I have yet to have a single crash or weird error while using it.
There is, fyi, a Windows version of Sylpheed, but it tends to be relatively unstable.
Honestly, I think this is the last thing Linux needs. To hit that goal, I think the only way it's going to happen anytime soon is to basically try to emulate Windows.
This is inherently *wrong*. We should be trying to beat Windows by being better than them..not by being "as good" or "beating them at their own game". I'm not against ease-of-use or making the system more intuitive, but there should be a line drawn between "user-friendly" and "made for retards". To the most amateur of users, easy means things like configuration wizards and pop-up tips that show you what to do because you're too lazy to check things out on your own.
Maybe i'm wrong or out of line, but i've always been attracted to open-source software because it wasn't Windows. It wasn't Corporate America's Vision of The Desktop PC. It was the peoples vision of how to do things. Linux/BSD/etc have a long road ahead, but we can't take the path of least resistance and try to bring users to our side by making it just another MS product to them.
I won't argue with you on most/all of this, but none of these are especially unique "features". My first foray into Linux was Red Hat 6.2 and 7.0, at which point I tossed *both* out the friggin' window and went the FreeBSD route. Haven't looked back since.
Since you don't appear to be taking system securing and app installs into account, i'll mention that it takes me about 20 minutes, if that, to get FreeBSD going. This includes setting up my basic firewall, setting up X, and establishing basic security. I'll usually spend more time tightening things down, but we don't seem to be taking that into account..
If I need a SERIOUS system, I can customize whatever the hell I want. The difference is, I don't have to wade through any pre-installed junk; I customize pretty much anything and everything I want to.
Oh yeah, and I can port just about anything I want to from Linux.
I can't speak for Suse or Debian because I gave up on Linux after experiencing the carcrash that was RH 7.
To each his own, though. I'm sure Mandrake works great for you, and that's cool..but I really don't understand why you've been modded so highly for things that could be applied to just about any distribution/OS/kitten/whatever. It's just a matter of how intuitive the system is, or how well you know it. For my needs and my way of thinking, FreeBSD was easy to figure out, easy to customize, and presented the way I wanted things; minimal and free of cruft, so I could do things my way for a change.
It seems Nantero has taken a "hint" from IBM by trying to beat them to the punch.
Wired had an article in April of 2000 on a technology called MRAM being developed by Stuart Parkin at IBM. Very interesting stuff, and they had working prototypes before this Nantero thing. From what I can tell, Nantero probably read the same article I did, as the similarities are quite remarkable.
Check it out: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/mram.html
All in all, it sounds like a nice big loophole, and something that shouldn't be ignored. We generally entrust these companies with our personal information, crossing our fingers that it will be kept private, and that trust in continually betrayed.
It actually makes me really angry. We are, after all, the ones keeping these fuckers in business..unfortunately, in many cases, we aren't given a choice as to which business we patronize. In my area, for instance, there is *one* phone company that provides access. My only other option is to have a cellphone only, but then I have to go outside just to keep the signal alive.
Slashdot Mirror
Ahhh, shit. Somehow, this posted to the wrong friggin' discussion.
Um... see City of Heroes article. Yeah.
Personally, i'm with the bloke who noted that he never really feels any sense of achievement from these games. My problems with subscription-based gameplay aside, i've just never felt any particular pull towards most online games.
Puzzles and all are great, but for me, it's the underlying story that grabs me. If there's no story, but the gameplay is great, I just give it up. It's reasons like this that even amongst FPS games, I prefer those with some kind of driving *reason*, ala System Shock 2 or Half-Life.
For myself, and hopefully others, the benefit of these games should be the active updates and evolution of the game itself. Instead, i've found that it usually turns into chatting and clustering together to fight monsters and gain experience. Until there's some kind of ever-evolving, adaptive storyline and game world, I guess I just don't get the appeal. I mean, why shell out cash each month to talk to people and fight mindless, repetitive battles? It'd be like Final Fantasy with an endless number of random encounters and no actual storyline or character depth.
So, i'm curious... anyone know of any half-decent online games that suit what i'm looking for without killing my bank account?
Two words for you, dude: Call Center.
I work at a call center for a bank, providing customer service for home equity customers. Each and every day, I am berated, belittled, and dehumanized by people who seem to think that because I work as a representative for a company, I deserve to be their personal punching bag.
My breaks are scheduled to a specific time and I cannot deviate from them. If I come in 1 minute late, everyone notices. If I need to go to the bathroom, I can't just get up and go, I have to ask someone or wait until I have a break. The list goes on. I spend my day as a slave, and come home bitter and resentful most nights. Unfortunately, it's virtually thing only thing I can do that pays enough to take care of the bills and still have "fun money" left over.
Appreciate what you've got, man. You could be doing a LOT worse.
Can we say *yawn*?
Ximian pops up looking like Outlook. The overall layout looks like Windows. Ad nauseum. Once again, someone is scraping together a Linux distro, trying to make it look like Windows, and giving us absolutely jack in terms of innovation, *better* usability, or creativity. Trying to accomodate Windows users by giving them a similar interface, but branding it Linux, is just plain foolish.
Make a product that's better than Windows on *all* counts, is bundled with custom-written applications instead of tweaked versions of existing ones, and then i'll raise an eyebrow.
I don't think Windows is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but let's acknowledge the faults of the alternatives. There are dozens upon dozens of Linux distributions, and so far, i've seen virtually *nothing* worth noting from an interface perspective. We brand everything as being intended for this and that audience, this and that purpose, whatever emphasis..but with the exception of some underlying framework, isn't this just a essentially a rehash of what dozens have done before?
I'm sure this will get more than few people stepping up to proclaim the vast differences between their distro of choice, but please save it. "Debian uses apt!", "Gentoo uses portage and is intended for..!" meh. They're both Linux, they both lend the capacity to do whatever the hell you want, and they can both be made to run the exact same applications...which, really, is what the average end user cares about, above all.
The average user is going to take one look at this stuff and go, "Ok, so if it looks like Windows, but doesn't run all the apps I need, why bother?"
I'm not so sure about that.
The populace may not like it, but i'd bet that it would happen regardless. We're all up-in-arms about the RIAA, but a large percentage of people *still* continue to buy popular music and support those assholes. We grumble over gas prices, but we still purchase SUV's that guzzle the stuff like it's going out of style.
Once people are convinced they need/want something, they'll continue to satiate that need, regardless of who hands it out to them.
..Your husband is a moron. I suggest you develop a taste for the many ramen varieties. Kthx.
So is yours. You're essentially comparing apples and oranges.
Let's take this for example:
I played the flute for many years. Due to similar fingerings on the saxophone, clarinet, oboe, and piccolo, I could technically pick up any one of them and know the notes. However, when you get down to the grit of things, there are variances which make it more difficult than just picking up the instrument and displaying the kind of proficiency I have with a flute. Things such as breath control, positioning of the mouth, the differences between an embouchure and a reed, size and weight, positioning of the keys along the instrument, intonation, and so on and so forth.
3D modeling applications, audio sequencers, and programs which posess a greater scope of functions than say, an email program, are not all created equal simply because they have the same basic function. There are always similarities, but each one has specific ways of doing something which the user must adapt to, practice, and condition themselves into comfortably using. Having prior knowledge of an existing application, let's say XSI or Maya, and then sitting down with Blender, would certainly lend the user a general idea of where to start..However, there will still be those initial growing pains as the user accomodates to it. This is generally accepted even with email clients, as configuration options and features generally differ from one program to another.
I'm not going to argue whether or not Blender's UI is good or bad, but when using 3D programs, you've got to expect a degree of complexity and some bad UI decisions. As others have noted, this is bound to happen, simply because of the massive capabilities of virtually any 3D program.
I'd just like to find an excuse not to have to tuck my shirt in. There's nothing worse than constantly being aware of the fact that if you suddenly get an erection or need to "readjust", anyone looking at you will notice a sudden shift in your pants.
Long sleeve shirts? I like to think of them as crotch guards.
Technically, you can. Using simple programs like Soundforge, we've slowly started recording our vinyl to ogg. It's not as fast or generally convenient as ripping a CD, but it works.
Exactly...and just as you have the freedom *not* to use a closed-source driver, you also have the freedom to take advantage of it.
Too often, I see people confusing freedom with politics. Though they sometimes collide, they are *not* the same thing.
Personally, I don't give a crap whether or not the drivers are closed-source. If I ever put the cash down on a 3DLabs card, i'd be a lot more interested in being able to use it on my OS of choice. The freedom to do high-end 3D or video work on Linux as opposed to Windows is a lot more interesting to me than the ability to modify the source code of the drivers.
So here's a hint: Stop buying music from labels affiliated with the RIAA, sit down for a couple hours, and search out some independent artists and labels who aren't just more of the same recycled garbage.
t p://www.malignantrecords.comr ds.comt p://www.coldmeat.se
http://www.delikatessen-records.com
*I* dictate the music I listen to. If the RIAA is forcing you to buy their junk, that's your problem for being a victim of marketing ploys.
I stopped supporting the RIAA and popular music nearly a decade ago. So what's your problem?
Go get yerself some tunes:
http://www.mute.com
http://www.ant-zen.com
ht
http://www.warpreco
http://music.hyperreal.org/labels/fax
ht
http://www.outwardmusic.com
This list could go on forever...I happen to listen to a more electronic and noisy variety of music, so many (all?) of these labels may not appeal to you, but that isn't the point. It doesn't matter what kind of music you like, there are literally *thousands* of alternatives out there open for exploration.
Well, it does seem to be their track record. After all, exactly 3 years after the release of Win2k, it's being certified as "secure".
Thing is, i'm not sure Plextor's intended audience for this drive is the typical "pass a disc around" sort of use. It seems to me that it's more viable, in general, as a more effctive form of backing things up for home users and the like who can't/won't shell out for a tape drive or external drive.
For someone like myself, this is fantastic. For everyone else? Well, use what works. That's all we can really do.
I'd also add that while I agree that standards are important, complaining obviously isn't doing the trick..so maybe you *should* start taking the time to QA media, so you don't waste even more time hunting around for a system that will work with your odd CD-R's.
You missed my point.
It's that technology is advancing incorrectly. We're being given products that do little beyond bridging a gap between the first and the last, so to speak. I'm talking about taking longer to release products, but releasing more innovative and necessary products when you *do* release something.
Maybe i'm not thinking realistically, but i'm fond of the idea of products that last, and products that truly deliver. Monitors with ghosting images and cd-r drives that fail after less than 2 years isn't what I call good business; it's what I call being swindled.
I'll give Tom's Hardware some credit for mentioning a few key points, but I also think they missed one very key issue.
..but there are a few things missing here. Namely reliability and focused innovation.
What does 'save hardware' really indicate?
From the slant of the writeup, they're assuming that this means the creation of software that will spur revolutionary, fast-paced hardware development. In part, this is accurate, as these companies do need to release products on a fairly consistent basis if they want to stay in business..
How often do we hear about or experience first-hand hardware failure? Weird driver bugs on video cards, hard drives that have to be RMA'ed after 3 months to a year, heat dissipation issues, the list goes on. Undoubtedly, things have become much more advanced since the days of the 486, but on the same token, we're also being introduced to a different set of problems. The technology is largely the same; it's just a new set of boundaries and guidelines.
The manufacturers are pumping out products every goddamned month, mostly introducing only minimal changes from product to product. I'm sorry, but this just isn't realistic.. the average buyer doesn't shell out cash for a new video card or whatever every goddamned month. When the time comes to upgrade, we want it to be a worthwhile one.. not just a $300+ clock-speed increase or an even more ridiculously huge heatsink added.
I think if the hardware industry needs saving, it's going to take a change in how things are done. From a user standpoint, at least, i'd like to see a greater emphasis on *quality* for once. There are very few companies I have genuine, lasting faith in. Everyone's in such a mad rush to be first, to hit the best benchmarks on the goddamned review sites, that they're making quality a secondary focus to just releasing something. I see it in software, I see it in hardware, and it's simply ridiculous.
Take this, for example:
A quick search on Pricewatch for 'Nvidia 5800' gives the lowest price at $268.00. Not too bad for a decent video card; worth it if you need it. Then I check for Nvidia 5900, which has only recently been released.
The price suddenly shoots up to $401.99. I can almost guarantee that in a month or two, it'll be nearly the same price as the 5800. You're getting only a marginal performance increase for nearly twice the price. If you opt for the 5800, you're getting sub-par performance when you could've waited a couple months for the 5900, spent the same as the 5800 would've cost, and gotten better performance. In another year, or less, they'll release *yet another* product.
So here's my question..no, my challenge.
Knock this shit off. Instead of releasing 2 or 3 or 4 products of the same type in a year or two, why not release one or two? Focus on ultra-quality performance and product, don't compromise on parts and manufacturing, and let the market ride the wave for awhile. These guys are surprised that sales are down when they've helped instill a stigma of "save your cash. our current product will be obsolete in a week!" They're going for maximum price, crossing their fingers that they'll sell a bunch before they move onto the next release on their roadmap.
The other issue is where these guys are focusing their efforts. You can clock shit up as much as you like, but shitty build quality coupled with a lack of genuine innovation is getting us nowhere. 3D animators/compositors/etc, digital video editors, gamers, etc. all *want* high performance, no doubt. So does the home user, if only to avoid the dreaded click-and-lag demon. But how long can they keep cranking speeds before they realize that there are more important things to consider?
For instance, we've got DDR-II slowly trickling in, mostly on video cards. Why frickin' bother?
Where's the goddamned MRAM? Where's our truly solid state hard drives? Why aren't we developing cooling solutions that don't involve water or noisy fans
I don't see this as too surprising..most people think that by installing ZoneAlarm and buying a Linksys router, they're immune to any form of attack or subversion. This extends to both wireless and traditional setups.
As I see it, there are two very fundamental reasons for this: lack of awareness and lack of comprehension. The average day-to-day user doesn't even know what a firewall is..what are the chances that they'll have a clue about encryption? I mean, c'mon..we're living in a world of users who largely think that SSL means that they're safe as can be, that security is something you purchase, and the only difference between wireless and a traditional connection is a lack of cables.
Awhile back, I was going on a pretty big BSD advocacy kick..y'know what finally made me give it up and shut my mouth? One girl had a bunch of questions, so I tried to answer them as best I can. I also wanted to make sure that I made clear the differences between Windows and BSD, as most MS users aren't accustomed to the file system, configuration, etc. So, naturally, I bring up firewalls, and how you essentially write your own rules for it by hand (in this particular instance, I was covering ipfw).
Rather than take my advice, she immediately became defensive, ranting off about how she's not some AOL kid, and how she already has ZoneAlarm, so she won't need to worry about a firewall on BSD. I could go on and on with stories like this.
I realize that this isn't just about wireless, but I don't think the issue is that limited in scope. Computer security is taboo to a lot of people, and unfortunately, it's a problem that needs to be addressed...or taken advantage of by those with a greater sense of what the fuck is up.
You may not be able to use sound very effectively as a pulverizing weapon, at least not in the sense that the parent post has mentioned..but, it is quite possible to cause physical discomfort, as you've noted.
Generally, I experience this more frequently when hearing things with a very low frequency response being played at a very high volume. There's a power electronics act from Italy called CazzoDio that put out a cd called "Il Tempo Della Locusta" a few years ago..the first time I listened to it, I turned the volume up pretty high. Within mere minutes, I could actually feel my stomach churning as a result of the low-end frequencies. I had a similar reaction when listening to Brighter Death Now at high volumes. On the flipside, British act Whitehouse has been known to have a more grating/piercing effect on the brain, as their sound is almost entirely based upon utilizing white noise and idiosynchratic screaming.
Regardless of our various tastes, it's definitely an interesting form for music to take.
More to the point, though, imagine this kind of sound being generated at even lower frequencies, and within an environment that doesn't have the restrictions on sound that my apartment does. I'd imagine that at just the right frequency, this could be utilized as weapon of sorts. On one of the mailing lists i'm on, I seem to recall us having a discussion a couple years ago about a particular frequency (-45dB maybe? bleh, I don't recall) being noted as literally "shit-inducing".
I'm sure we can all draw a nice mental image from that one..point is, if we can induce someone to take a spontaneous dump in their pants using nothing but sound, I don't see it as all that science-fiction to consider that we could kill a person with it or destroy a building. The trick, I think, would be focusing that sound so that it wouldn't extend beyond the object targeted.
As opposed to wasting your time replying to a pasty-faced nerd? :p
This also doesn't take into account the number of "power users" building their own systems..nor could it, since there's no real way to tell whether or not someone is building a completely new system or upgrading an existing one.
It also fails to mention the number of people buying both laptops *and* retail PCs.
I don't put much stock in statistics anyway, but I do kind of wonder where this Baker guy gets some of his figures from. Since when does your average LCD cost only $250 more than your average CRT? Personally, i'm a little confused as to why this is even put up as news.
"Attention! Experts say small computers are more appealing to the average user becuase they're compact and nicer to look at than big clunky fucking ones!"
Well..duh.
My preference for the last year or two has been Sylpheed. However, if you're restricted to Windows, I can say that I had a very good experience with Thunderbird, and so far, haven't found any reason not to continue using it. Even in such an infant stage of development, I have yet to have a single crash or weird error while using it.
There is, fyi, a Windows version of Sylpheed, but it tends to be relatively unstable.
..and things like that still happen to those of us who buy the damned things!
Honestly, I think this is the last thing Linux needs. To hit that goal, I think the only way it's going to happen anytime soon is to basically try to emulate Windows.
This is inherently *wrong*. We should be trying to beat Windows by being better than them..not by being "as good" or "beating them at their own game". I'm not against ease-of-use or making the system more intuitive, but there should be a line drawn between "user-friendly" and "made for retards". To the most amateur of users, easy means things like configuration wizards and pop-up tips that show you what to do because you're too lazy to check things out on your own.
Maybe i'm wrong or out of line, but i've always been attracted to open-source software because it wasn't Windows. It wasn't Corporate America's Vision of The Desktop PC. It was the peoples vision of how to do things. Linux/BSD/etc have a long road ahead, but we can't take the path of least resistance and try to bring users to our side by making it just another MS product to them.
We learned Microsoft and we can unlearn it, too.
I won't argue with you on most/all of this, but none of these are especially unique "features". My first foray into Linux was Red Hat 6.2 and 7.0, at which point I tossed *both* out the friggin' window and went the FreeBSD route. Haven't looked back since.
Since you don't appear to be taking system securing and app installs into account, i'll mention that it takes me about 20 minutes, if that, to get FreeBSD going. This includes setting up my basic firewall, setting up X, and establishing basic security. I'll usually spend more time tightening things down, but we don't seem to be taking that into account..
If I need a SERIOUS system, I can customize whatever the hell I want. The difference is, I don't have to wade through any pre-installed junk; I customize pretty much anything and everything I want to.
Oh yeah, and I can port just about anything I want to from Linux.
I can't speak for Suse or Debian because I gave up on Linux after experiencing the carcrash that was RH 7.
To each his own, though. I'm sure Mandrake works great for you, and that's cool..but I really don't understand why you've been modded so highly for things that could be applied to just about any distribution/OS/kitten/whatever. It's just a matter of how intuitive the system is, or how well you know it. For my needs and my way of thinking, FreeBSD was easy to figure out, easy to customize, and presented the way I wanted things; minimal and free of cruft, so I could do things my way for a change.
It seems Nantero has taken a "hint" from IBM by trying to beat them to the punch.
Wired had an article in April of 2000 on a technology called MRAM being developed by Stuart Parkin at IBM. Very interesting stuff, and they had working prototypes before this Nantero thing. From what I can tell, Nantero probably read the same article I did, as the similarities are quite remarkable.
Check it out: http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/8.04/mram.html
All in all, it sounds like a nice big loophole, and something that shouldn't be ignored. We generally entrust these companies with our personal information, crossing our fingers that it will be kept private, and that trust in continually betrayed.
It actually makes me really angry. We are, after all, the ones keeping these fuckers in business..unfortunately, in many cases, we aren't given a choice as to which business we patronize. In my area, for instance, there is *one* phone company that provides access. My only other option is to have a cellphone only, but then I have to go outside just to keep the signal alive.
Isn't capitalism great?