I always liked the first one the best. The more complicated it got, the more I seemed distracted from the ultimate goal of conquering the universe. I seen got tired of having to micromanage all the colonies in the second game, especially towards the end when I had dozens of colonies. It was tedious, and seemed pointless. The original just had little sliders to adjust, it took seconds to do and did not even take me away from the main screen. Other good things included limiting the ship designs to six, and stacking the same ships together to simplify battles. It also kept me from having to constantly redesign ships, because with the 6 design limit, once you hit 6 you couldn't create a new design without scrapping an old one. And with a maximum of 6 possible stacks ships you'd have to command in battle, battles went a lot more quicker than the 80+ ship battles of MOO2 that would take a half hour it seemed.
Also, in general, computers are stupid. The simplier the game is, the easier it is to program a good AI for it. Programming a computer to play you in checkers is far easier than chess, for example. The original Master of Orion's AI did have some huge faults, but it was pretty decent. The second game's AI was just a moron, and cheated massively in order to stay competitive beyond the easiest setting. I didn't get a good feel for the third game's AI however. With internet gaming this is not as much of an issue, but when I do have to play a computer, the computer is generally much better at playing simpler games. And it is much more enjoyable to play an AI that has some skill, instead of one that cheats to make up for it's massive stupidity.
The problem is that many of the 3rd party batteries sold through spam and flea markets cut out the circuitry designed to protect against overheating and gas buildup. Hence, they can explode (though it doesn't seem to happen that often - only a handful of explosions during millions of hours of cell phone use).
Now I suppose Nokia could go out, and try to purchase examples of all these cheap batteries that have flooded the market, take them apart and test them to see if they are safe. And then they could publish a list of "approved" 3rd party batteries or something like that. It would be simular to how AMD approves cooling fans for their processors. But that would be a major hassle, not to mention impossible given the fly-by-night nature of some of these companies that sell the batteries.
Or they could just issue a blanket statement saying not to use 3rd party batteries because we can't gaurentee they are safe or will work right with the phone.
This isn't really the same as Lexmark and their ink. Lexmark is hostile to the 3rd party ink vendors, using tools like the DMCA to try to shut them down. Nokia, on the other hand, seems to take more of a hands-off approach, saying they don't recommend the 3rd party equipment - but as far as I know they haven't tried to shut them down or anything. It's kind of surprising as Lexmark seems motivated only by profit, but for Nokia every time a cell phone blows up and someone gets hurt - Nokia is going to recieve bad press even if the explosion is totally not their fault.
Well the game is going to stress hardware like graphics and sound, where as a web server does not. All of the memory timings and AGP settings in the bios are going to be tweaked to the maximum settings.
Actually, it's more of a driver thing more than anything else, especially in Windows. None of the bleeding-edge gaming hardware has completely stable drivers if you ask me. Sure, they seem pretty stable, but I doubt you'd be able to keep a game going for days, weeks, or more without interuptions.
Putting DRM, the fact that you have to use Windows to use it, and the fact that some of them can launch IE aside - the Microsoft Windows codecs are not that bad. You can get decent video in a decent amount of space, and the player is pretty simple and fast. Also, with.wmv I know what I'm getting, whereas.mpg and especially.avi I have no idea how those files are encoded. WMP is certainly better than Realplayer and Quicktime (for Windows). Plus, you can pass around Windows video files to your non-technical friends and they can play them without having to do any tinkering.
Apparently the computer has been atleast partially dismantled, and some of the peices are at the Smithsonian.
From a visitor guide buried in the Smithsonian's website: http://www.si.edu/pdf/SIVisitorGuide.pdf
"WHAT'S NEW Deep Blue Chess Computer. Known for being the first computer to beat a reigning world champion chess player in a regulation match, IBM's Deep Blue sparked questions about the implications of a computer being able to beat the human mind. Five years after Gary Kasparov lost to Deep Blue in a chess match, Deep Blue remains a cultural icon. This new display includes one of Deep Blue?s two tow- ers, chess memorabilia, a video of the Kasparov-Deep Blue match and a flipbook of cartoons commemorating the event."
The heat coils have a lot more surface area, and are located outside of the fridge. Most fridges simply use convection to cool the coils, and thus no fans (I have seen some fridges that do use a fan though). The compressor generally makes much less noise than the computer's fans. Fridges contain a lot of insulation and are air-tight, and thus noise cannot get out, so chances are you could put a ton of fans inside the thing and not hear them. This is the theory.
But a standard little dorm fridge will not work. They are not very powerful units, only capable of moving as little as 100 BTU/hr of heat out. (Most window air conditioners can pull out 5000 BTU/hr or more). 100BTU/hr is about 100,000J/hr or about 30W (30J/s). Now this is fine for cooling your pop and salsa and holding it cool - but most computers pump out considerably more heat, the new Intel processor all by itself puts out 3 times as much heat! What will happen if you try this mod is that the poor fridge is not going to be capable of pulling out that much heat and the computer is going to roast itself in the insulated fridge. Not good.
A regular full sized fridge can pull out about 650BTU/hr, or about 190W of heat. This is closer to workable, but considering 350W+ power supplies are the norm now, even then I think the computer will slowly roast itself in the fridge anyway. And you also have the problem of wear on the compressor which will be running almost continously, and will probably burn out quickly. Not to mention the energy use of running a fridge like that.
I think the only solution for a super-cool rig will be to either get something like an aquarium chiller, that can take out something around 1600 BTU/hr and is already setup to chill liquids (perfect for water cooling I guess), or work with trying to convert a window AC unit as a computer cooler. You could also try full sized freezers, especially the top-loading ones. I don't know how powerful they are, but they are probably more powerful than your standard fridge.
This is an important point, as I have found many cooling solutions - especially ones in OEM computers to be inadequate. It seems that they design the cooling to handle normal usage, with a bit of intensive use thrown in here and there. Put something like SETI on the computer, and watch as temperatures soar. I used to be pretty impressed with how quiet some OEM computers are, until I figured that bit out.
I've tried ICQLite several times and every version I've had to go back to Pro. Despite the fact that ICQLite is supposed to be "Lite", I have found it crashes and is generally slower than it's bloatware cousin. Don't have problems with Pro though, except on slow computers it takes forever to start up.
Doesn't AOL already offer services like this?
on
FCC Lifts AOL IM Limits
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
I have ICQ Pro (ICQ is owned by AOL) and it has features like this built in, though I have never used them. I do believe it makes use of external software like Microsoft's NetMeeting though, which is not distributed with ICQ Pro.
Do they get away with this because ICQ is not considered AOL IM? Even though ICQLite can talk to AOL IM, and I think AOL IM can add ICQ contacts to their list.
The only problem with the Matrix world using human bodies for energy is how do they feed all these humans? Humans are not just free energy, we generate that bioelectricity and heat from energy found in food. Our food supply is dependent on the sun, as all links of the food chain ultimately lead back to plants, which live off the sun's energy. With no sun in the Matrix world, there wouldn't be much food. Liquidifing the dead is not going to be anywhere close to cutting it.
Really biomass in some ways is not that different from what they did in the Matrix world - they just get the energy directly from the body while we are discussing getting energy from the human body's waste. The big difference is that we have not yet scorched the sky.
Most of the power on the planet comes from solar energy! Where did all that coal and oil come from? Plants. Where do plants get their energy? The sun. Wind power and hydro power are also just solar energy, as they depend on weather patterns, which of course only happen because of the sun's energy. There are few sources of energy that aren't from the sun - nuclear, geothermal, and tidal are all I can think of. Only one of those sees much widespread use.
All this talk about biomass is just another way to harnass the sun's energy indirectly, as all pretty much all life on the planet gets it's energy from the sun, either directly (plants) or indirectly (animals that eat plants, or animals that eat animals that eat plants, etc.). The idea is let mother nature do some of the work of gathering and storing the energy for us, in a manner that's relatively clean and environmentally friendly - because using the solar energy she stored in coal and oil will not last forever and has taken a huge toll on the environment.
Plasma TVs don't cost $5000 because of dumbshit consumers who like to overpay and not shop around. They cost $5000 because they are a new technology, that is expensive to make, and currently has few buyers. If you even had a basic sense of economics and the laws of supply and demand, you'd realize that in a free market plasma TVs cost $5000 because they have to. And just because a few people do not shop around doesn't mean nobody does.
In a few years plasma TVs may cost $500 as technology advances, productions numbers go up, lowering the cost per unit. Right now I doubt any TV maker could produce plasma TVs for any where near $500 and turn a profit. Because if such a maker existed, they would quickly take advantage of the fact that they can make them cheaper than their competition and undercut them. The only reason this would not happen is if there was some Plasma TV Cartel around, which as far as I can tell does not exist.
Take a look at standard CRT televisions. Right now, I can go get a color TV for under $100. In 1960, a color TV cost something like $3000 in 1960 dollars. Was the high price tag back then because of stupid dumbshit consumers that didn't shop around and companies gouging them because of it? And if our 1960's consumers shopped around they too could of had $100 color TVs too (or more like $20 color TVs in 1960 dollars)? No way! In 1960 color TVs were complicated expensive things, using large circuit boards of discreet components and vacuum tubes. They cost $3000 because they had too, it took 30+ years and major advances in technology before the $100 TV was possible.
And lastly, shopping smart does not equal buying the lowest cost. It may work for homogenous goods like 2% milk or eggs - but when it comes to things like computers it just isn't smart. There is always someone out there that will cut all corners possible to get the cheapest unit out the door. And you end up with things like the Yugo and Packard Bell computers. If you like to buy cheap shit like that, go ahead. But I'm too poor to waste money like that.
$25,000 will get you a pretty nicely equipped BMW Mini Cooper. The base model runs about $17,000 too. Yeah, unbelievably cheap for a BMW, I know. Not that I would want one...
I would happily take any working 1999-era PCs off of anyone's hands that no longer want it for free. Right now, it seems the high-end Pentium computers and low end PII's are about the area where you can still give them away - anything slower and you'll probably have to pay to get rid of it cause few would want it.
Also, I would note that most 1999-era PCs will also run Windows XP, even if it's a tad slow.
Well when you look at the money you fork out for an Apple, it's not surprising that people tend to hang onto them for such a long time.
In the PC world, I can get a pretty nice setup for ~$500 or so. And I can replace that setup for ~$500 later on with something better, or I'll be upgrading it. So it's no surprise some people get a new PC every 2-3 years or fork out some money for some substantial upgrades.
But if you look at the top end PCs, like $2500 or more, they are so ridiculously overpowered (250GB+ drives, 1GB+ of ram, 3.2Ghz+ processors, tons of toys like DVD writers) that if I was to buy one I would easily expect atleast 5+ years of use out of it without major upgrades or replacing it. That's where I see the Apple G5 right now.
Well you got to define the contest first. In a straight line drag, the Taurus will probably smoke the Honda. In a rally type situation where handling is import, the Taurus may find itself horribly outclassed (but I don't know, the Taurus may do fine). Demolition derby (my personal favorite way to for cars to compete), the Honda is going to get pounded.
I remember one road test where they rated several luxury cars based upon whether or not they could make a trip on one tank of gas - and if they didn't how close they got to it. I got a huge laugh out of that one since my old '88 Nissan could of easily driven farther on a tank of gas than all but one or two of the luxury cars!
I was about to post basically the same thing, but I see it has already been done. I agree that has to be the biggest waste of time ever, right up there with the site that has plastic lawn furniture sex.
Oh well.... now back to rating people on hotornot.com
It's not really a dead pixel - sounds like somehow you got a spec of dirt in there or something simular that's blocking the electron beam. Either that or they missed a spot with the phosphorus.
Just like how Microsoft charges for their upgrades? (Just in case you didn't know,Win95=Win4.0, Win98=Win4.1, Win2000=Win5.0, WinXP=Win5.1)
I like how the Microsoft-zealots like to bash the Mac people for this, yet Microsoft does the exact same thing but covers it up by calling their versions things like ME and XP instead of the real version numbers.
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention if you can only overclock, say, 50% of them, would you run into problems with nodes running at different speeds?
I always liked the first one the best. The more complicated it got, the more I seemed distracted from the ultimate goal of conquering the universe. I seen got tired of having to micromanage all the colonies in the second game, especially towards the end when I had dozens of colonies. It was tedious, and seemed pointless. The original just had little sliders to adjust, it took seconds to do and did not even take me away from the main screen. Other good things included limiting the ship designs to six, and stacking the same ships together to simplify battles. It also kept me from having to constantly redesign ships, because with the 6 design limit, once you hit 6 you couldn't create a new design without scrapping an old one. And with a maximum of 6 possible stacks ships you'd have to command in battle, battles went a lot more quicker than the 80+ ship battles of MOO2 that would take a half hour it seemed.
Also, in general, computers are stupid. The simplier the game is, the easier it is to program a good AI for it. Programming a computer to play you in checkers is far easier than chess, for example. The original Master of Orion's AI did have some huge faults, but it was pretty decent. The second game's AI was just a moron, and cheated massively in order to stay competitive beyond the easiest setting. I didn't get a good feel for the third game's AI however. With internet gaming this is not as much of an issue, but when I do have to play a computer, the computer is generally much better at playing simpler games. And it is much more enjoyable to play an AI that has some skill, instead of one that cheats to make up for it's massive stupidity.
The problem is that many of the 3rd party batteries sold through spam and flea markets cut out the circuitry designed to protect against overheating and gas buildup. Hence, they can explode (though it doesn't seem to happen that often - only a handful of explosions during millions of hours of cell phone use).
Now I suppose Nokia could go out, and try to purchase examples of all these cheap batteries that have flooded the market, take them apart and test them to see if they are safe. And then they could publish a list of "approved" 3rd party batteries or something like that. It would be simular to how AMD approves cooling fans for their processors. But that would be a major hassle, not to mention impossible given the fly-by-night nature of some of these companies that sell the batteries.
Or they could just issue a blanket statement saying not to use 3rd party batteries because we can't gaurentee they are safe or will work right with the phone.
This isn't really the same as Lexmark and their ink. Lexmark is hostile to the 3rd party ink vendors, using tools like the DMCA to try to shut them down. Nokia, on the other hand, seems to take more of a hands-off approach, saying they don't recommend the 3rd party equipment - but as far as I know they haven't tried to shut them down or anything. It's kind of surprising as Lexmark seems motivated only by profit, but for Nokia every time a cell phone blows up and someone gets hurt - Nokia is going to recieve bad press even if the explosion is totally not their fault.
Well the game is going to stress hardware like graphics and sound, where as a web server does not. All of the memory timings and AGP settings in the bios are going to be tweaked to the maximum settings.
Actually, it's more of a driver thing more than anything else, especially in Windows. None of the bleeding-edge gaming hardware has completely stable drivers if you ask me. Sure, they seem pretty stable, but I doubt you'd be able to keep a game going for days, weeks, or more without interuptions.
Putting DRM, the fact that you have to use Windows to use it, and the fact that some of them can launch IE aside - the Microsoft Windows codecs are not that bad. You can get decent video in a decent amount of space, and the player is pretty simple and fast. Also, with .wmv I know what I'm getting, whereas .mpg and especially .avi I have no idea how those files are encoded. WMP is certainly better than Realplayer and Quicktime (for Windows). Plus, you can pass around Windows video files to your non-technical friends and they can play them without having to do any tinkering.
Wow, how come no one told me about ffdshow earlier? I just uninstalled the free DiVX 5.05 and put in ffdshow and they work pretty slick.
I take it some of ffdshow is also in Xine?
Apparently the computer has been atleast partially dismantled, and some of the peices are at the Smithsonian.
f
From a visitor guide buried in the Smithsonian's website:
http://www.si.edu/pdf/SIVisitorGuide.pd
"WHAT'S NEW
Deep Blue Chess Computer. Known for being the first computer to
beat a reigning world champion chess player in a regulation match,
IBM's Deep Blue sparked questions about the implications of a
computer being able to beat the human mind. Five years after Gary
Kasparov lost to Deep Blue in a chess match, Deep Blue remains a
cultural icon. This new display includes one of Deep Blue?s two tow-
ers, chess memorabilia, a video of the Kasparov-Deep Blue match
and a flipbook of cartoons commemorating the event."
I have 6 open PCI slots. If I fill them all up, does that count?
The heat coils have a lot more surface area, and are located outside of the fridge. Most fridges simply use convection to cool the coils, and thus no fans (I have seen some fridges that do use a fan though). The compressor generally makes much less noise than the computer's fans. Fridges contain a lot of insulation and are air-tight, and thus noise cannot get out, so chances are you could put a ton of fans inside the thing and not hear them. This is the theory.
But a standard little dorm fridge will not work. They are not very powerful units, only capable of moving as little as 100 BTU/hr of heat out. (Most window air conditioners can pull out 5000 BTU/hr or more). 100BTU/hr is about 100,000J/hr or about 30W (30J/s). Now this is fine for cooling your pop and salsa and holding it cool - but most computers pump out considerably more heat, the new Intel processor all by itself puts out 3 times as much heat! What will happen if you try this mod is that the poor fridge is not going to be capable of pulling out that much heat and the computer is going to roast itself in the insulated fridge. Not good.
A regular full sized fridge can pull out about 650BTU/hr, or about 190W of heat. This is closer to workable, but considering 350W+ power supplies are the norm now, even then I think the computer will slowly roast itself in the fridge anyway. And you also have the problem of wear on the compressor which will be running almost continously, and will probably burn out quickly. Not to mention the energy use of running a fridge like that.
I think the only solution for a super-cool rig will be to either get something like an aquarium chiller, that can take out something around 1600 BTU/hr and is already setup to chill liquids (perfect for water cooling I guess), or work with trying to convert a window AC unit as a computer cooler. You could also try full sized freezers, especially the top-loading ones. I don't know how powerful they are, but they are probably more powerful than your standard fridge.
This is an important point, as I have found many cooling solutions - especially ones in OEM computers to be inadequate. It seems that they design the cooling to handle normal usage, with a bit of intensive use thrown in here and there. Put something like SETI on the computer, and watch as temperatures soar. I used to be pretty impressed with how quiet some OEM computers are, until I figured that bit out.
Keep in mind that with some of the AMD setups out there with no thermal protection, you can also be in big trouble if the *air* cooling fails too!
I think the future is going to be computers that generate less heat, but in the meantime we may see commercial water cooled systems for a while.
I've tried ICQLite several times and every version I've had to go back to Pro. Despite the fact that ICQLite is supposed to be "Lite", I have found it crashes and is generally slower than it's bloatware cousin. Don't have problems with Pro though, except on slow computers it takes forever to start up.
I have ICQ Pro (ICQ is owned by AOL) and it has features like this built in, though I have never used them. I do believe it makes use of external software like Microsoft's NetMeeting though, which is not distributed with ICQ Pro.
Do they get away with this because ICQ is not considered AOL IM? Even though ICQLite can talk to AOL IM, and I think AOL IM can add ICQ contacts to their list.
The only problem with the Matrix world using human bodies for energy is how do they feed all these humans? Humans are not just free energy, we generate that bioelectricity and heat from energy found in food. Our food supply is dependent on the sun, as all links of the food chain ultimately lead back to plants, which live off the sun's energy. With no sun in the Matrix world, there wouldn't be much food. Liquidifing the dead is not going to be anywhere close to cutting it.
Really biomass in some ways is not that different from what they did in the Matrix world - they just get the energy directly from the body while we are discussing getting energy from the human body's waste. The big difference is that we have not yet scorched the sky.
Most of the power on the planet comes from solar energy! Where did all that coal and oil come from? Plants. Where do plants get their energy? The sun. Wind power and hydro power are also just solar energy, as they depend on weather patterns, which of course only happen because of the sun's energy. There are few sources of energy that aren't from the sun - nuclear, geothermal, and tidal are all I can think of. Only one of those sees much widespread use.
All this talk about biomass is just another way to harnass the sun's energy indirectly, as all pretty much all life on the planet gets it's energy from the sun, either directly (plants) or indirectly (animals that eat plants, or animals that eat animals that eat plants, etc.). The idea is let mother nature do some of the work of gathering and storing the energy for us, in a manner that's relatively clean and environmentally friendly - because using the solar energy she stored in coal and oil will not last forever and has taken a huge toll on the environment.
Maybe you should shop around for a clue.
Plasma TVs don't cost $5000 because of dumbshit consumers who like to overpay and not shop around. They cost $5000 because they are a new technology, that is expensive to make, and currently has few buyers. If you even had a basic sense of economics and the laws of supply and demand, you'd realize that in a free market plasma TVs cost $5000 because they have to. And just because a few people do not shop around doesn't mean nobody does.
In a few years plasma TVs may cost $500 as technology advances, productions numbers go up, lowering the cost per unit. Right now I doubt any TV maker could produce plasma TVs for any where near $500 and turn a profit. Because if such a maker existed, they would quickly take advantage of the fact that they can make them cheaper than their competition and undercut them. The only reason this would not happen is if there was some Plasma TV Cartel around, which as far as I can tell does not exist.
Take a look at standard CRT televisions. Right now, I can go get a color TV for under $100. In 1960, a color TV cost something like $3000 in 1960 dollars. Was the high price tag back then because of stupid dumbshit consumers that didn't shop around and companies gouging them because of it? And if our 1960's consumers shopped around they too could of had $100 color TVs too (or more like $20 color TVs in 1960 dollars)? No way! In 1960 color TVs were complicated expensive things, using large circuit boards of discreet components and vacuum tubes. They cost $3000 because they had too, it took 30+ years and major advances in technology before the $100 TV was possible.
And lastly, shopping smart does not equal buying the lowest cost. It may work for homogenous goods like 2% milk or eggs - but when it comes to things like computers it just isn't smart. There is always someone out there that will cut all corners possible to get the cheapest unit out the door. And you end up with things like the Yugo and Packard Bell computers. If you like to buy cheap shit like that, go ahead. But I'm too poor to waste money like that.
$25,000 will get you a pretty nicely equipped BMW Mini Cooper. The base model runs about $17,000 too. Yeah, unbelievably cheap for a BMW, I know. Not that I would want one...
I would happily take any working 1999-era PCs off of anyone's hands that no longer want it for free. Right now, it seems the high-end Pentium computers and low end PII's are about the area where you can still give them away - anything slower and you'll probably have to pay to get rid of it cause few would want it.
Also, I would note that most 1999-era PCs will also run Windows XP, even if it's a tad slow.
Well when you look at the money you fork out for an Apple, it's not surprising that people tend to hang onto them for such a long time.
In the PC world, I can get a pretty nice setup for ~$500 or so. And I can replace that setup for ~$500 later on with something better, or I'll be upgrading it. So it's no surprise some people get a new PC every 2-3 years or fork out some money for some substantial upgrades.
But if you look at the top end PCs, like $2500 or more, they are so ridiculously overpowered (250GB+ drives, 1GB+ of ram, 3.2Ghz+ processors, tons of toys like DVD writers) that if I was to buy one I would easily expect atleast 5+ years of use out of it without major upgrades or replacing it. That's where I see the Apple G5 right now.
Well you got to define the contest first. In a straight line drag, the Taurus will probably smoke the Honda. In a rally type situation where handling is import, the Taurus may find itself horribly outclassed (but I don't know, the Taurus may do fine). Demolition derby (my personal favorite way to for cars to compete), the Honda is going to get pounded.
I remember one road test where they rated several luxury cars based upon whether or not they could make a trip on one tank of gas - and if they didn't how close they got to it. I got a huge laugh out of that one since my old '88 Nissan could of easily driven farther on a tank of gas than all but one or two of the luxury cars!
I was about to post basically the same thing, but I see it has already been done. I agree that has to be the biggest waste of time ever, right up there with the site that has plastic lawn furniture sex.
Oh well.... now back to rating people on hotornot.com
Yeah, but can it run DOS 5.^H^H^H^H^HLinux?
It's not really a dead pixel - sounds like somehow you got a spec of dirt in there or something simular that's blocking the electron beam. Either that or they missed a spot with the phosphorus.
Just like how Microsoft charges for their upgrades? (Just in case you didn't know,Win95=Win4.0, Win98=Win4.1, Win2000=Win5.0, WinXP=Win5.1)
I like how the Microsoft-zealots like to bash the Mac people for this, yet Microsoft does the exact same thing but covers it up by calling their versions things like ME and XP instead of the real version numbers.
I take it then that you drive around in 250F heat a lot?