Particularly the $3200 Quad (dual dual core) 64 bit G5 PowerMac. It's also fairly difficult to beat the iMac (although it can be matched) G5's dollar-for-mip, at $1700 for a 64 bit machine with a 20" wide-screen LCD included.
I fail to see how the included 20" widescreen monitor increases your CPU's speed. You don't happen to drive a souped up Honda, by chance?
Even so, it is easy to build a PC that's going to smoke any of Apple's computers at speed for the same price. The G5 was hot back in 2002, but it's now 2005 and the PC world has long since caught up and surpassed it.
It used to be that the first number was the DirectX version that the hardware supported. ATI 7xxx = DirectX7, ATI8xxx = DirectX8. Then they screwed that up by releasing the ATI 8500 series chipset as the new budget lineup in the 9xxx series (hence, the 9000, 9100, etc. are only DirectX8). Now, I don't know what the heck they are doing.
I use Opera mostly, but at work, I have to use IE6. If you ask me, IE6 is terrible.
*Opera is much, much faster. It renders faster, and most importantly you can go back instantly. Because IE6 re-renders the page when you hit the back button, it works at glacial rates in comparsion. You may also get errors if the previous page was a form or dynamically generated too. (this is also an issue I have with Firefox) *Mouse gestures. Enough said. *Integrated search. Enough said. *Tabs is not a gimmick to me. Sure, if you only have 1-2 sites open at once, it seems pretty pointless. But managing 10+ IE windows is a pain in the ass, but a breeze in Opera's MDI. (Firefox has some work to do here too, it likes to spawn new windows far too much) *Whenever you make a new window in IE, it reloads whatever is loaded in the current window. Annoying. Only recently did I figure out that you can get a fresh one by launching the IE shortcut in the start menu though. Still annoying though. *The pop up blocker in IE is awful. It blocks legit, desired pop ups all the time, while also letting through a fair share of the unwanted ones. Opera's isn't perfect either, but works much better.
Wow, what revisionist history we have going on here! The only reason IE overtook Netscape, was not because it was the 'better' browser, but due to the fact that it was 'dumped' on to the market, had the $$$ to burn and 'integrated' it into their OS. Netscape didn't have a chance.
Actually, the Netscape 4.x series were pretty terrible browsers. I know many people switched over to IE because of it (I didn't myself - I stuck it out with Netscape until I discovered Opera 5). By the time Netscape got 6.0 out, it was too late - not to mention Netscape 6.0 wasn't that great of a browser either.
The other poster is right. While they would end up with standards compliance, the problem is that Opera doesn't have all the IE rendering bugs. All the "designed for IE" sites wouldn't work right.
Given IE's history, chances are IE7 won't have half of IE6's rendering bugs, while at the same time introducing twice as many rendering bugs to make up for the loss. Changing things over to Opera wouldn't really be any different.
A tax on food is only regressive if food is taxed at a higher rate than stuff that rich people buy.
A tax on food is still regressive. A person making less money is going to spend a larger proportion of their income on food, and thus a larger percentage of their income will go towards the food tax. I know that rich people will tend to buy more expensive food, but really - you can only eat so much.
To begin with, the analog hole can not be closed because the brain's audio and video inputs are analog. Therefore, I can point my lovingly cared for pre-drm camera at the screen, record every frame, then reassemble them.
I wonder if your old analog camera was to capture the watermarks in the film along with the rest of the information, would a newer TV or computer monitor refuse to play back the digital file?
The way the current US government is operating, any revolution would be squashed as quickly as it begun. With the secret wiretaps and eavesdropping on conversations, the government would likely eliminate the "threat" long before the general public had any idea that it existed.
Why? The last thing Windows needs is bouncing icons, brushed metal, and windows that don't maximize.
Really, what Microsoft needs to do is stop moving stuff around aimlessly, and choose some better colors for the default theme. For all the work I've seen them doing in the Vista beta versions, I have yet to see anything that really improves on the interface found in Windows 2000.
I never got Family Guy. The whole premise of the show seems to be "Hey, look at what we just referenced! Aren't we clever?". To me, it just ends up being too contrived. Atleast the Simpsons tries to be somewhat witty about it.
I've heard that Winamp is basically dead now - no new features, and no changes other than the occasional bug fix and marketing tie-in.
With that said, I use Winamp and even if development stopped tomorrow, would probably still use the current version until it no longer compatible with what whatever system I would be using.
Damn, the first thing I do when I get a new dell is: start->control panel->add/remove programs and remove with wold abandon. I usually wipe "trial security package", all the dell quickset crap, any dell support crap, and any other software that I just don't want in there. Doesn't EVERYBODY?:)
I don't. I usually just wipe the thing and reinstall the OS. It's often faster, plus by doing that you can be absolutely sure that you nuked everything.
I just wish roll-your-own laptops were possible. Then I could be entirely free of these bloated bastards.
They sort of are available. I have seen notebook "barebone" systems, but most of them were already pretty complete (case, display, mainboard, keyboard, integrated graphics, integrated network, etc.) You just added your own harddrive, memory, optical drive, and maybe processor.
Unfortunately, as the review made clear, the Dell doesn't come with any install discs. So have fun trying to "reinstall". This seems to be a general trend -- my sister recently bought a Gateway, and it too came without the OS installation discs. You were supposed to create them yourself with a special one-time-use-only routine that copied the OS to CD-RW discs. But the routine crapped out, and produced bad install discs. Gateway's support recommendatation was for her to send the machine back to get her drives reinitialized! Building your own box is making a lot more sense now.
It's no wonder after a couple of years, many OEM computers end up running some warez'd version of Windows XP Pro corporate.
Your post is fundamentally wrong. Evolution is capable of producing new species of macroscopic organisms in a matter of months. For example, new species of Malawi Cichlids (a kind of fish) have been observed developing over a six month period, in the wild, by scientific researchers.
In short: Evolution does NOT work on geological timescales. It is quite capable of working WAY faster than that.
All the factors that affect how fast changes will occur in a particular species are not understood yet, but fast changes have been observed and documented.
The exception doesn't make the rule. Just because some species have been observed to evolve very fast, doesn't mean we are going to get Polar Bear version 2.0 in the next few years. Most evolutionary changes DO take place over geological time scales.
What if the distance becomes so large so quickly that even the fittest bears won't make it? What if only 1% of the bears make it? Will there be enough diversity in bears left to prevent problems with inbreeding and stuff like that? Just because species can evolve doesn't mean they can't go extinct.
This may be a bit pedantic, but you can press Ctrl+Alt+Del with one hand with all the keyboards I tried. This will work unless you have a keyboard that lacks the Ctrl and Alt keys on the right side. It even worked on my laptop, although it's certainly awkward, and is probably hard for children.
It wouldn't work very well on the original IBM 84 key keyboards. Though if I remember right, even back then there were 3rd party keyboards that had the now familiar 101 key layout.
You are (1) wrong and (2) stupid. Now think about it again.
You are both wrong and stupid. The car will have to start climbing up the ramp before it can start pushing it down. While obviously the path the car will ultimately take won't be the same as if the ramp was fixed in place, it won't be the same as if the ramp wasn't there either. I'm not going to work through it, but my guess is that the path will be some kind of arc (atleast for the front tires, the back tires may see a mostly flat surface depending on how fast the ramp rebounds).
Doesn't anyone read articles? The weight of the vehicle presses down on plates that drive a generator. This has nothing to do with the drivetrain of the vehicles creating the power.
Even so, the car will have to burn an additional amount of gas to climb out of the shallow hole it will suddenly find itself in. The energy has to come from somewhere.
Why do you say that? XPSP1 is just as functional as XPSP2. Comparing it to Windows 95 is just plain stupid. Sure, SP2 has things to help out the unwashed masses, but things like security center (I can manage my firewall/antivirus just fine, thank you), and IE6SP2 (seriously, who around here uses IE?) really don't do anything for me. On the other hand, SP2 is slower and has a borked TCP/IP stack, and that's enough to keep me on SP1 for the time being.
Slashdot Mirror
Particularly the $3200 Quad (dual dual core) 64 bit G5 PowerMac. It's also fairly difficult to beat the iMac (although it can be matched) G5's dollar-for-mip, at $1700 for a 64 bit machine with a 20" wide-screen LCD included.
I fail to see how the included 20" widescreen monitor increases your CPU's speed. You don't happen to drive a souped up Honda, by chance?
Even so, it is easy to build a PC that's going to smoke any of Apple's computers at speed for the same price. The G5 was hot back in 2002, but it's now 2005 and the PC world has long since caught up and surpassed it.
It used to be that the first number was the DirectX version that the hardware supported. ATI 7xxx = DirectX7, ATI8xxx = DirectX8. Then they screwed that up by releasing the ATI 8500 series chipset as the new budget lineup in the 9xxx series (hence, the 9000, 9100, etc. are only DirectX8). Now, I don't know what the heck they are doing.
I use Opera mostly, but at work, I have to use IE6. If you ask me, IE6 is terrible.
*Opera is much, much faster. It renders faster, and most importantly you can go back instantly. Because IE6 re-renders the page when you hit the back button, it works at glacial rates in comparsion. You may also get errors if the previous page was a form or dynamically generated too. (this is also an issue I have with Firefox)
*Mouse gestures. Enough said.
*Integrated search. Enough said.
*Tabs is not a gimmick to me. Sure, if you only have 1-2 sites open at once, it seems pretty pointless. But managing 10+ IE windows is a pain in the ass, but a breeze in Opera's MDI. (Firefox has some work to do here too, it likes to spawn new windows far too much)
*Whenever you make a new window in IE, it reloads whatever is loaded in the current window. Annoying. Only recently did I figure out that you can get a fresh one by launching the IE shortcut in the start menu though. Still annoying though.
*The pop up blocker in IE is awful. It blocks legit, desired pop ups all the time, while also letting through a fair share of the unwanted ones. Opera's isn't perfect either, but works much better.
Wow, what revisionist history we have going on here! The only reason IE overtook Netscape, was not because it was the 'better' browser, but due to the fact that it was 'dumped' on to the market, had the $$$ to burn and 'integrated' it into their OS. Netscape didn't have a chance.
Actually, the Netscape 4.x series were pretty terrible browsers. I know many people switched over to IE because of it (I didn't myself - I stuck it out with Netscape until I discovered Opera 5). By the time Netscape got 6.0 out, it was too late - not to mention Netscape 6.0 wasn't that great of a browser either.
The other poster is right. While they would end up with standards compliance, the problem is that Opera doesn't have all the IE rendering bugs. All the "designed for IE" sites wouldn't work right.
Given IE's history, chances are IE7 won't have half of IE6's rendering bugs, while at the same time introducing twice as many rendering bugs to make up for the loss. Changing things over to Opera wouldn't really be any different.
A tax on food is only regressive if food is taxed at a higher rate than stuff that rich people buy.
A tax on food is still regressive. A person making less money is going to spend a larger proportion of their income on food, and thus a larger percentage of their income will go towards the food tax. I know that rich people will tend to buy more expensive food, but really - you can only eat so much.
To begin with, the analog hole can not be closed because the brain's audio and video inputs are analog. Therefore, I can point my lovingly cared for pre-drm camera at the screen, record every frame, then reassemble them.
I wonder if your old analog camera was to capture the watermarks in the film along with the rest of the information, would a newer TV or computer monitor refuse to play back the digital file?
The way the current US government is operating, any revolution would be squashed as quickly as it begun. With the secret wiretaps and eavesdropping on conversations, the government would likely eliminate the "threat" long before the general public had any idea that it existed.
Why? The last thing Windows needs is bouncing icons, brushed metal, and windows that don't maximize.
Really, what Microsoft needs to do is stop moving stuff around aimlessly, and choose some better colors for the default theme. For all the work I've seen them doing in the Vista beta versions, I have yet to see anything that really improves on the interface found in Windows 2000.
I never got Family Guy. The whole premise of the show seems to be "Hey, look at what we just referenced! Aren't we clever?". To me, it just ends up being too contrived. Atleast the Simpsons tries to be somewhat witty about it.
But each to their own.
I've heard that Winamp is basically dead now - no new features, and no changes other than the occasional bug fix and marketing tie-in.
With that said, I use Winamp and even if development stopped tomorrow, would probably still use the current version until it no longer compatible with what whatever system I would be using.
Yeah, but they also have access to a nearly endless supply of free, slightly out of date computer hardware. :)
Damn, the first thing I do when I get a new dell is: :)
start->control panel->add/remove programs and remove with wold abandon. I usually wipe "trial security package", all the dell quickset crap, any dell support crap, and any other software that I just don't want in there. Doesn't EVERYBODY?
I don't. I usually just wipe the thing and reinstall the OS. It's often faster, plus by doing that you can be absolutely sure that you nuked everything.
I just wish roll-your-own laptops were possible. Then I could be entirely free of these bloated bastards.
They sort of are available. I have seen notebook "barebone" systems, but most of them were already pretty complete (case, display, mainboard, keyboard, integrated graphics, integrated network, etc.) You just added your own harddrive, memory, optical drive, and maybe processor.
Unfortunately, as the review made clear, the Dell doesn't come with any install discs. So have fun trying to "reinstall". This seems to be a general trend -- my sister recently bought a Gateway, and it too came without the OS installation discs. You were supposed to create them yourself with a special one-time-use-only routine that copied the OS to CD-RW discs. But the routine crapped out, and produced bad install discs. Gateway's support recommendatation was for her to send the machine back to get her drives reinitialized! Building your own box is making a lot more sense now.
It's no wonder after a couple of years, many OEM computers end up running some warez'd version of Windows XP Pro corporate.
Your post is fundamentally wrong. Evolution is capable of producing new species of macroscopic organisms in a matter of months. For example, new species of Malawi Cichlids (a kind of fish) have been observed developing over a six month period, in the wild, by scientific researchers.
In short: Evolution does NOT work on geological timescales. It is quite capable of working WAY faster than that.
All the factors that affect how fast changes will occur in a particular species are not understood yet, but fast changes have been observed and documented.
The exception doesn't make the rule. Just because some species have been observed to evolve very fast, doesn't mean we are going to get Polar Bear version 2.0 in the next few years. Most evolutionary changes DO take place over geological time scales.
What if the distance becomes so large so quickly that even the fittest bears won't make it? What if only 1% of the bears make it? Will there be enough diversity in bears left to prevent problems with inbreeding and stuff like that? Just because species can evolve doesn't mean they can't go extinct.
This may be a bit pedantic, but you can press Ctrl+Alt+Del with one hand with all the keyboards I tried. This will work unless you have a keyboard that lacks the Ctrl and Alt keys on the right side. It even worked on my laptop, although it's certainly awkward, and is probably hard for children.
It wouldn't work very well on the original IBM 84 key keyboards. Though if I remember right, even back then there were 3rd party keyboards that had the now familiar 101 key layout.
Hint: using ASDF (with F in place of W) is vastly superior to WASD. That is all.
Someone must of grown up using an Apple II?
But on the other hand, the Toyota or Honda hybrid is going to:
*Have a much higher build quality
*Break down much less
*Require less maintance
*Be much cheaper to repair
I think I'll skip the Volkswagen.
It's not a win-win for people driving cares that already have regenerative braking.
They already pay less fuel taxes than everyone else so maybe it isn't so unfair after all?
You are (1) wrong and (2) stupid. Now think about it again.
You are both wrong and stupid. The car will have to start climbing up the ramp before it can start pushing it down. While obviously the path the car will ultimately take won't be the same as if the ramp was fixed in place, it won't be the same as if the ramp wasn't there either. I'm not going to work through it, but my guess is that the path will be some kind of arc (atleast for the front tires, the back tires may see a mostly flat surface depending on how fast the ramp rebounds).
Doesn't anyone read articles? The weight of the vehicle presses down on plates that drive a generator. This has nothing to do with the drivetrain of the vehicles creating the power.
Even so, the car will have to burn an additional amount of gas to climb out of the shallow hole it will suddenly find itself in. The energy has to come from somewhere.
Actually, you can get rid of it, but it involves a bit of poking around in system files.
You might try this:
http://www.tacktech.com/display.cfm?ttid=288
Why do you say that? XPSP1 is just as functional as XPSP2. Comparing it to Windows 95 is just plain stupid. Sure, SP2 has things to help out the unwashed masses, but things like security center (I can manage my firewall/antivirus just fine, thank you), and IE6SP2 (seriously, who around here uses IE?) really don't do anything for me. On the other hand, SP2 is slower and has a borked TCP/IP stack, and that's enough to keep me on SP1 for the time being.