that IS interesting, regardless of the flames you've gotten/will get. I remember cursing the loud-azz fans on the card I borrowed in 1999 while my defective Matrox (Please don't attack me for this brand, trust me, good or bad, I agree with you) was enroute for replacement. I am quite certain that the loud-fan card was 25% as powerful as your card (at best) yet your Radeon is silent and fanless.
Is that due to better heatsinks? Better chips? I wanna know because I want REALLY don't need another fan in my house. Quieter, cooler chip, no fan = quieter, cooler, less power consumption overall? That is what I am looking for. I is now winter-weather here (Charlotte, NC, where "almost freezing" is close enough to winter for me) and I still run the a/c in my tiny studio in order to counteract the heat from me and my fans (yeah, yeah, and the computers they cool, but that doesn't sound good at all).
putting songs from Rhapsody onto an iPod is the same as putting songs from iTunes onto every portable music player other than the iPod: buy, burn and rip. I don't have a portable music player so this isn't an issue with me.
I don't think the subscription model is ideal for most people. I talk about Rhapsody with my friends but I have yet to recommend any other them join. I don't pay for cable unlike most of my friends, so I have that disposable entertainment income. I also listen to more music than most of my friends, so buying songs at $1 a pop would leave me with a few full hard drives and an empty bank account.
you're correct, just like if you stop paying your ISP bill, you don't get to surf Slashdot anymore and if you don't pay your cable bill you don't get to watch MTV and if you stop paying rent, you don't get to hang out in that house anymore.
They do have a "burn to CD" option, 79 cents per song. I tried it just to see if it actually worked (it did) but I don't see myself using it at all. I have no need for a CD of music, I don't even own a CD player except for the CD-RWs in my computers and my DVD player.
This isn't the case with many (most?) people, but storing music was a pain in my azz. My normal listening habit was to rip songs I wanted to hear, listen until they bored me (weeks, months, depending on the songs), then delete to make room for others.
because, for example, last night, when I went to bed, I wanted to hear Christoper O'Rielly's True Love Waits CD. Then, when I got up, I decided to play the entire new Outkast CD set, then a few Slick Rick songs. All on demand, almost no buffering time (2-3 seconds, tops) and higher quality than 99% of Kazaa downloads (I have compared) and the iTunes radio stations (which are lower quality and not on-demand).
How much would it cost me to listen to high quality full song versions of Nora Jone's CD on iTunes and decide I didn't want to buy it today? It cost me nothing on Rhapsody (I've gotten my $10 worth this month by far), and when I give it a second chance next week, it will still have cost me nothing. Some of my favorite CDs are ones that I hated on first listen, sometimes second listen. Listening to a few 30 second samples of songs will not allow me to make up my mind for good music, Rhapsody does.
I want something that RealOne Rhapsody will work on. I don't really care to copy or download music, I just want to hear it on demand whenever I want to hear it. Rhapsody works great for that, a good price, the selection is pretty large, I can install the program whereever I want but I can't listen to it in the car yet. Put it on a portable with a wireless connection and I'm there.
There are shrink-wrapped.NET apps, most coming from MS (since they are one of the few companies that make boxed software that only runs on MS).
Windows XP was released before the.Net framework v1.0 was released, so XP does not come with it installed but it (v1.1 at this time) is listed on the Windows Update site. Windows 2003 Server does ship with v1.1 of the.Net framework.
you're bitching up the wrong tree. This is an article about leaked screenshots of the alledged new GUI. These are not screenshots of uptime or stability. This should have been moderated "off topic".
I've had the same install of XP since shortly before it was released, I have installed, uninstalled, beat on, pissed on, and sliced and diced it so much I keep expecting it to just laugh at me one day when I reboot, but it is still going strong. I have had MAJOR problems with Outlook 2002 since I installed the office service pack, but no real problems with XP at all. I've had handfulls of games, XML editors, database management tools, audio & video codecs and players, and other programs that I've installed and uninstalled after a while. I currently have 3 versions of Visual Studio, 2 versions of the.Net framework, SQL Server 2000, WMP9, Photoshop, a funky little desktop sidebar tool (toy, actually), SharpDevelop, Firebird, Office XP, Flash MX, Netscape 7, Kazaa Lite, RealOne, 2 CD burning programs, an FTP program, Acrobat, a bad scanner, some IM programs, several web sites, and whatever programs I'm working/playing on at the moment.
I just love it when people jump at the chance to insult my intelligence/knowledge. Now can you please insult the color of my socks, my hairstyle and anything else you can think of to pretend you know about me? Thanks.
if I bought a copy of Red Hat and it contained illegal code, there is no way I would even begin to consider paying SCO for the illegal code. Either Red Hat would pay SCO or Red Hat would refund my money and I would stop using the product.
the RIAA released less CDs in the year 2000 than in 1999 (the commonly used years to show that downloading hurt sales). The profits per release actually rose, which means that it is entirely possible that if they had released the same amount of CDs, their profits would have gone up.
Slashdot Mirror
actual job post
I sent the link to their site to a friend right after this was posted, he wrote back "are we going?"
I had no clue that they were playing here Wednesday. SWEET!
It will probably be too late, but I will reply to this comment Wednesday night or Thursday.
that IS interesting, regardless of the flames you've gotten/will get. I remember cursing the loud-azz fans on the card I borrowed in 1999 while my defective Matrox (Please don't attack me for this brand, trust me, good or bad, I agree with you) was enroute for replacement. I am quite certain that the loud-fan card was 25% as powerful as your card (at best) yet your Radeon is silent and fanless.
Is that due to better heatsinks? Better chips? I wanna know because I want REALLY don't need another fan in my house. Quieter, cooler chip, no fan = quieter, cooler, less power consumption overall? That is what I am looking for. I is now winter-weather here (Charlotte, NC, where "almost freezing" is close enough to winter for me) and I still run the a/c in my tiny studio in order to counteract the heat from me and my fans (yeah, yeah, and the computers they cool, but that doesn't sound good at all).
the Taun-Tauns looked fine!?!? You are BLIND? The Taun-Taun dying in the snow was the single worst effect in the Star Wars canon. Period.
stalking someone on a book tour is "literal" stalking. ;)
I guess you missed the "I wanted to hear" part of the sentence.
putting songs from Rhapsody onto an iPod is the same as putting songs from iTunes onto every portable music player other than the iPod: buy, burn and rip. I don't have a portable music player so this isn't an issue with me.
I don't think the subscription model is ideal for most people. I talk about Rhapsody with my friends but I have yet to recommend any other them join. I don't pay for cable unlike most of my friends, so I have that disposable entertainment income. I also listen to more music than most of my friends, so buying songs at $1 a pop would leave me with a few full hard drives and an empty bank account.
you're correct, just like if you stop paying your ISP bill, you don't get to surf Slashdot anymore and if you don't pay your cable bill you don't get to watch MTV and if you stop paying rent, you don't get to hang out in that house anymore.
They do have a "burn to CD" option, 79 cents per song. I tried it just to see if it actually worked (it did) but I don't see myself using it at all. I have no need for a CD of music, I don't even own a CD player except for the CD-RWs in my computers and my DVD player.
This isn't the case with many (most?) people, but storing music was a pain in my azz. My normal listening habit was to rip songs I wanted to hear, listen until they bored me (weeks, months, depending on the songs), then delete to make room for others.
because, for example, last night, when I went to bed, I wanted to hear Christoper O'Rielly's True Love Waits CD. Then, when I got up, I decided to play the entire new Outkast CD set, then a few Slick Rick songs. All on demand, almost no buffering time (2-3 seconds, tops) and higher quality than 99% of Kazaa downloads (I have compared) and the iTunes radio stations (which are lower quality and not on-demand).
How much would it cost me to listen to high quality full song versions of Nora Jone's CD on iTunes and decide I didn't want to buy it today? It cost me nothing on Rhapsody (I've gotten my $10 worth this month by far), and when I give it a second chance next week, it will still have cost me nothing. Some of my favorite CDs are ones that I hated on first listen, sometimes second listen. Listening to a few 30 second samples of songs will not allow me to make up my mind for good music, Rhapsody does.
I want something that RealOne Rhapsody will work on. I don't really care to copy or download music, I just want to hear it on demand whenever I want to hear it. Rhapsody works great for that, a good price, the selection is pretty large, I can install the program whereever I want but I can't listen to it in the car yet. Put it on a portable with a wireless connection and I'm there.
It will be SQL Server 2004 if named by year.
There are shrink-wrapped .NET apps, most coming from MS (since they are one of the few companies that make boxed software that only runs on MS).
.Net framework v1.0 was released, so XP does not come with it installed but it (v1.1 at this time) is listed on the Windows Update site. Windows 2003 Server does ship with v1.1 of the .Net framework.
Windows XP was released before the
you're bitching up the wrong tree. This is an article about leaked screenshots of the alledged new GUI. These are not screenshots of uptime or stability. This should have been moderated "off topic".
You mean SP4?
I used to have a Kyocero SmartPhone.
when I sent someone a link to http://www.windowsupdate.com this morning and there was no site there, I noticed and cared.
I've had the same install of XP since shortly before it was released, I have installed, uninstalled, beat on, pissed on, and sliced and diced it so much I keep expecting it to just laugh at me one day when I reboot, but it is still going strong. I have had MAJOR problems with Outlook 2002 since I installed the office service pack, but no real problems with XP at all. I've had handfulls of games, XML editors, database management tools, audio & video codecs and players, and other programs that I've installed and uninstalled after a while. I currently have 3 versions of Visual Studio, 2 versions of the .Net framework, SQL Server 2000, WMP9, Photoshop, a funky little desktop sidebar tool (toy, actually), SharpDevelop, Firebird, Office XP, Flash MX, Netscape 7, Kazaa Lite, RealOne, 2 CD burning programs, an FTP program, Acrobat, a bad scanner, some IM programs, several web sites, and whatever programs I'm working/playing on at the moment.
And like I said, only Outlook gives me trouble.
I just love it when people jump at the chance to insult my intelligence/knowledge. Now can you please insult the color of my socks, my hairstyle and anything else you can think of to pretend you know about me? Thanks.
1. I wouldn't just download something like that, I would support the company with my $, right?
2. I don't know if their claims have merits, either, but saying that the user owes them money makes me think not.
if I bought a copy of Red Hat and it contained illegal code, there is no way I would even begin to consider paying SCO for the illegal code. Either Red Hat would pay SCO or Red Hat would refund my money and I would stop using the product.
from the first paragraph, even:
"whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress."
but you should consider going to a different theater. your results are not typical.
the RIAA released less CDs in the year 2000 than in 1999 (the commonly used years to show that downloading hurt sales). The profits per release actually rose, which means that it is entirely possible that if they had released the same amount of CDs, their profits would have gone up.
your analogy is off a little. Change it so that your manufacturer's cars are being stolen but their profits are up.
"I doubt there are many hunnies wanting to spend a night watching DVDs in your bachelor pad."
Thank god that isn't true...