But now some people are starting to have REALLY fast pipes. And for them TCP is becoming the limiting factor.
Its pretty darn easy to get really fast pipes. Motherboards ship with Gigabit ethernet now, Gigabit switches are way down in price. Most companies these days are building their networks on TCP/IP, this could be a pretty big thing corporate networks, iSCSI, etc. 10GigE isnt all that far away either.
TCP/IP is bigger than the internet these days [admitedly, the server is down so I can't read the article]
Sigh, but alas this is how the meida keeps it self running, run old stories again.
Its callled a "slow news day" and "filler". Besides, the number of people who read it the first time around is pretty low. While I admit its hardly "Stuff that matters" we have a hard enough time avoiding repeats every 4 hours, 2 years aint bad.
dell would send you dual-processors and charge you for the uni.
You sure they weren't just seeing Hyper-threading enabled? While I could certainly accept that this happened for any number of reasons, they are all something of a stretch (no second CPU messed up airflow, causing overheating of the one, the factory ran out of "terminators" and a 2nd Celeron was only a few bucks more? They were EOL'ing that lowest end chip and were blowing out stock, maybe somebody else canceled the order prior to shipment and it was cheaper to "upgrade" their order than sell them "refurbished") Some of the stuff Dell charges extra for cost them almost nothing (enabling RAID on a PE 2x50 usually means adding a 5 cent "jumper key" and a 128MB of RAM, yet they charge $300.
But what ever it is, I doubt its because Dell's production line can't handle the customization.
They could offer something like perpetual licensing . . . then there is no risk with slipped schedules. Term licensing is where you get fucked.
Microsoft does offer perpetual licenses. Buy a copy of Windows XP and you are licensed to run it forever. What software assurance offers is an entitlement to all upgrades released while your contract is in effect, only Open Source and a few small titles offer upgrades in perpetuity. Plus, many companies already took advantage of these term to upgrade Windows 2000 workstations to Windows XP, so its not as bad as the headline makes out. Then again, I've successfully negotiate terms in my maintenance contracts that they are valid until Product X is released to cover for slippage, in those cases where the manufacturer was attempting to collect for Product X in advance. I wouldn't be surprised to see MS release Windows YA (NT 5.2) as an interim, just to keep folks happy, Sort of a Windows ME for the NT generation.
Of course, we also passed on the killer opportunity MS's Software Assurance offered us. We're not racing to be the first on the block with MS's latest.
My belief is that, should the networks be overly enthusiastic about use of the broadcast flag, cable operators will increasingly have to sell other uses of their networks (Internet, telephony, etc) to make up the revenue as increasing numbers of people dump the television side of the system.
I don't buy it. Set the broadcast flag so I can't TiVo my shows anymore and I'm still not going to buy the DVD's, I'm less likely to because I won't "get into" the show in the first place. Major networks will have to rely on me remembering to be home and tuned to their channel when that show who's commercial or write up caught my eye two weeks ago; trust me, that aint going to happen. Instead, I'll go back to watching the discovery channels, FoodTV, Infomercials, oddball cartoons, etc., like I did in the days before Tivo. I'll bitch about their repetivness, though I imagine its a lot better now that there's 40 different Discovery channels. No, if anything this will increase teh need for cable, because I need more options when *I* watch TV, not during that 3 hour band that TV exec's consider "Prime Time". Fun stuff like Myth Buster's, or Iron Chef, or those insane knife auctioning guys (Havent watched them hawk their "collector's knife sets" since I got Tivo).
Here's my idea. If the MPAA is concerned about piracy because of HDTV, don't show the damned movie on TV. If I want to watch a movie these days, I go to block buster, or I'll buy the DVD. Or I watch it on HBO. The damned pirates will just rent the DVD and rip it from there anyway, I doubt they are concerned about getting those last bits of resolution an specially preped HDTV movie copy (1024i vs 480i, I see no reason to convert a 24fps movie to 60fps video) before they compress it down to VCD quality anyway. So unless they movie studios are planning on abandoning the installed base of DVD owners the broadcast flag does them almost 0 good anyway. I imagine given a choice between paying for technology to cripple their TV viewing habits and not watching the content of overly paranoid movie studios, 80% of Americans would opt to pass on the extra content and watch my Big Fat Obnoxious Bride
And here's the kicker. This technology has already been rolled out; check out the MiniDisc player. Now, check out its secret implications: Record your Wedding toast on you're digital MiniDisc recorder, and it will do you the favor of enabling the "do not copy" bit for you. After all, it can't tell that you own all the rights to your speech, so to be safe it assumes you don't (else you could make unlimited digital copies after having gone through just 1 D>A>D conversion, and that would be downright un-American.
Nice to see an intelligent, reasoned response, because I didn't want to be the person defending this plan. I understand the motivation behind it, but it seems like it has the potential to have the runaway truck sort of unintended consequences that the DMCA has.
If I make of business of compiling facts, I need some means of preventing my clients from reselling these facts and undercutting my business, because like the music industry implies, I'll have only one customer who will then resell that data at a slightly lower price, who will in turn resell that data at a slightly lower price.
Problem is, what if you copyright a database of all the US Senators e-mail addresses. Does that mean I can't gather that publicly available information and publish it without paying you? What is the line where a list of facts becomes a "creative work" deserving a copyright? Can Google claim a copyright to the web, since their Index is a database of "Facts" and "Useful data relationships" forcing other search engines to pay royalties? Does Major League Baseball own a copyright on the Box scores? On Team statistics?
Now, my company relies on collecting "facts" and "establishing useful data relationships", and maybe with the right caveats, exemptions, etc. this might be a useful bill. Problem is we'd have to rely on Congress understanding all the implications of this law on current and future technology, and I just don't think they or anyone else is up to it.
Folks were avoiding the Itanium because it was a disaster; slow and expensive. We've been looking at 64 bit computing for a while, because of the seamless > 4GB RAM capabilities. Intel's PAE extensions are OK, but they really didn't solve any of the problems we were having.
The net result was we went to 64 bit PPC architecture 3 years ago on those critical systems, And everything has been fine. AIX works great, and IBM's embrace of GNU/Linux means an easy learning curve for us Linux users.
you have specifically designed a product that nobody else can make
While nobody else can make "Gillete Ultra Mach3 Turbo Platinum Edition refil blades", many other companies can and do make razor blades, not to mention a number of companies making electric razors. This effectively caps what Gillette can charge for its refils, there is some premium folks will pay for what they perceive brands name quality and superior product is worth, after which they will opt for the Schick Quattro, or maybe the Safeway disposables, or maybe even a nice Braun Electric. Realistically, that $12 you invested in the Mach3 "Razor" isn't trapping you in the Mach3 product very effectively.
There are various methods of calculating "Octane" ratings, here in the states we use a simple average of two methods. Thamks to the wonders of globalization, we can be pretty sure your BP 91 maps to our "regular" 87 octane, and your BP 98 maps to our "ultimate" 93. Not sure where the original poster is, but I've never seen a station without regular and premium; if a grade is missing, its usually the mid grade, to make room foe desiel or some such, because some cars "require" premium, and not having it means customers will drive to the next station. I've also heard of station that pump premium as mid grade, just to deal with lack of underground tank storage.
Anything else implies either oil companies are needlessly refining Australia's pump gas, or that automotive manufacturers are running radically different engine tunes/compression ratios in Australia. Its a large enough market to justify this, for sure, but I doubt even the magority of cars are so tweaked.
Terrorism is an act designed to throw fear (aka terror) into the mind of the public. Its not safe to walk the streets, because a Bomb might go off. Its not safe to shop in the market, because some idiot might strap explosives to him chest and blow himeself up, Not safe to go to the Olympics because some guy might leave a bowling bag full of Nitro in a public square. Not safe to work for the federal government because some moron has a rental truck, a couple containers of manure, and a few hundred gallons of Desiel.
It can be employed against societies or individuals. The big problem I have with it is that it is yet another "thought crime". Its changing the punishment of the crime dependant on the intentions of the criminal. Beat up a guy when you're drunk, it assult and battery. Beat up a guy of another race/sexual preference/shoe size when you're drunk, and its a "Hate Crime". Now sometimes this is good; run a red light and kill someone, its Manslaughter; wait to run the red light until you wife is there, its pre-meditated murder.
Re:Well... $49 at ipodbattery.com
on
iPod Mini Autopsy
·
· Score: 0, Flamebait
I'll take that $100.
Of course, someone who can't understand the concept of past tense isn't likely to have two bits to rub together, so I doubt I'll ever see it. Try to understand this you slack jawed nitwit. Just because I can do something today doesn't mean I could do it yesterday. Did Apple change their policy after the contraversy? Did Apple fail to to notify their support call centers about this option? Will you ever bother to pull you head out of your ass long enough to remember what fresh air smells like?
I don't really care. It would be nice if you spontaneously recognize what an ass you are, then I could feel this little lecture about how time progresses and things change over time wasn't a complete waste of my time, but I doubt I'll get even that much satisfaction.
The issue wasn't that the battery wasn't covered under warranty, I think everyone accepts that batteries, even rechargables, are consumable items, just like the brakes and motor oil in your car. The issue was that Apple wanted hundreds of dollars to replace the battery, making it cost effective to simply buy a new iPod when the battery died.
And my point is the VC's generally didn't do what they did out of GREED. Yes, they invest money in startups with the hope that over all they will get more back than they put in. To quote:
Someone exploiting venture capitalists? That's like a dog trying to exploit Purina. VCs are in the risk business and are all about exploitation
The use of the word exploitation, and your failure to differentiate "financial types" from VC's, which you still haven't done. You seem to be implying that VC's are exploiters, like pimps trawling the bus stations for desparate vulnrable women.
The tone I am still picking up from you is that VC's should give folks lots of money to try to make their dreams come true, then stay out of it. If the company is successful, they should be happy to get their original investment back, and if the startup owner feels generous, maybe a little extra for their trouble. Sorry, in my mind thats 60's era Hippie ideaology, that other people's resourses should be free for their use, and they should not expect compensation beyond love and appreciation.
If this isn't your premise, then perhaps you should learn to express your ideas clearly, instead of rambling from subject to subject without letting your audiene know the subject has shifted. Why the stupid yet nasty throwaway line about VC's if they weren't the subject of your tirade about greed?
VCs are in the risk business and are all about exploitation.
What utter hippie bullshit.
I'm sure in hippie geek land folks would regularly eschew solid investments in established publicly traded companies with years of proven and audited financial results to invest in your harebrained schemes to sell books over the internet, but in the real world, people don't like putting their money in folks hands for a share of a business that is little more than business plan in a pretty binder. VC's use their knowledge to try to identify the rare combination of good business plan with good business people, then invest large sums of money to help "founders" get their ideas off the ground when the founders lack the hundreds of thousands (or even millions) required to get their ideas roling. The mantra was "get big fast" because like lots of great ideas, once someone saw your idea, it was easy to copy, and if you had only attracted a couple thousand people to your site so far, the other guy could accelerate right past you; after a year even those first thousand would realize you had the idea first.
Sure, there was a period when some VC's got richer, though most turned around and plowed it right back into new companies. But the VC's weren't the evil AOL Ad exec's, demanding 50% of a startup's funding; They weren't the Stock promoters yelling buy buy buy when a company couldn't possibly justify the price outside some "New Economy" voodoo. They weren't business school drop-out and two-bit hucksters who decided they wanted to get rich off the whole DotCom scam, who hired freinds into VP jobs they weren't qualified for, who took management off-sites to exotic locations so they could "think outside the box". They didn't tell ordinary people to mortgage their houses to buy more stock in BBQs.com. They worst thing they did was encourage companies to stay in the incestuous Silicon Valley area because they thought the networking was worthwhile, and thats where the real skills were. Most of them were "drinking the Kool-Aid", if they gave bad advice it was because thats what they believed was the right thing to do, not because they were involved in a high tech scam. They were already rich.
Yeah, our VC's are blaming other people for their mistakes now. They shut down other people's DotCom's so they could stem the bleeding, They blamed the CEO for stuff they told him to do then fired him. But he did plenty on his own, and on his way out his concern wasn't our well being, it was "How do I get as big a settlement as I can?" When the time came, our VC's sacraficed to keep us afloat.
So lay off the VC's. They are still out there investing in start ups, which keeps programers from having to take jobs pushing computers at the local Wal*mart.
Seems like folks (other than me:) could trivially diff the source and find out what "enhancements" thay have made. I would expect that the authors of the code would be very interested in the changes amd would check it out, at the very least.
All in all, this is a very good thing. If nothing else, its kind of hard for other OS's to compete with "The NSA's OS" on security concerns.
Even more so this could be seen as an endorsement by Eminem of iTunes.
This is the tact Slim Shady is taking, which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard, An 8 year old raps a few lyrics and we interpret this as an endorsement by Marshal Mathers? He must think his fans are more peanut brained that most. Does he endorse every numbskull with a boom box sitting on a corner playing his music? Does he worry that I'll see a blood covered 8-foot killer carrying rusty machete with peices of flesh still hanging off and a boom box playing "8-mile" and think "He must be a nice guy, because Eminem endorses him?
Maybe its some dumb publiscist, like the one that went psycho on Gary Layson while Jane was out of the country for writing this cartoon. Jane later said she loved it and apologized to Mr Lawson.
Re-recording the music clears you from having to pay/clear with the original artists, but you must still clear it with the original authors of the music as well. It just costs a lot less, which is why all those cheap compiliation albums thay sell are rarely the originals but covers by Hot Potato's All Polka Band
Radio stations have ALWAYS had to pay to play music on the air. It just that record companies often pay "consultants" to encourage "read: Pay" radio stations to play their songs. They also often sign liberal agreements with stations (Pay us $x a month and you can play anything from our catalog). Dance clubs have to pay as well, as technically does the DJ who charges you to play at your Bat Mitzah. Restaurant chains don't sing the traditional "Happy Birthday" song because they would have to pay royalties to the song writer.
The issue is that these people are using other people's IP to make money. There are situatons where the owner might agree to license the IP for free (or even pay the "player") but its up to the owner to decide that.
Didn't Intel basically include a high performance GigE NIC in all their 865/875 chipset for all those who opted for it? Granted, they aren't laptops, bt there's a ton of these machines out there, the big problem is building a GigE network of sufficient scale.
To change the channel one handed, you have to be able to hold the remote securely while a finger/thumb presses buttons. The human is designed so that when you hold something, and extended finger is above/infront of your hand. At best, thumb (not known for being the most dexterous of digits) can reach what is held in the fingers (in other words, we have opposable thumbs:)
So to use your thumb technique, you have to put the bottom of the remote in your fingers, which will generally put the center of balance of the remote beyond your fingers/hand. If you dont hold tight, it will tend to fall out of your hand; tricky when you need to traverse the entire keypad twice to tune to channel 203. Not that it can't be done, or that with practice it wont become second nature.
I have both, and theres just a night and day difference in the usability of the remote, from using it in a dark room (The peanut remote I have to feel the top to determine the correct end to point at the TV, then find the TV power button clever concealed near the rest of the identical feeling buttons from memory. The Sony remote is obvious by weight and shape which end is which, and the power button is top dead center (yeah, the big SAT button to turn off the Tivo is pretty useless, it would be better as the TV power button, but what you going to do?).
The TiVo folks really did a great job in the design of the remote
I don't get it. The peanut shaped remote of the Tivo is the worst design ever in my book. I have the Sont T-60 and a Hughes DirecTivo, and I'm waiting for somebody else to put out a new DirecTiVo so I dump the Hughes just because of the remote.
The Sony Remote is easy to tell one end from the other, buttons are distictive to the touch, works well one handed, and its very comfortable.
The peanut controller requires extra work to determine one end from the other, often requires two hands for basic channel entry (The buttons are at the bottom, so one han must hold while the other pushes), and lacks tactile feedback to help you locate buttons. I suspect this article was written by some chowder-head who never used a really good remote, and was just impressed by the fact that anything more than "We need three buttons, labeled A B and C" went in to remore design.
Worst part is, I think they are attached to this design as part of a "branding" thing. At least they have abandoned the god awful front panel design that plagued their units for years.
Well, there is no reason for dropping the Itanium right now, since then Xeon-class will propbably will probably only extended with some 64-bit functionality while the Itanium remains 64-bit to the bone.
And maintains its VLIW architecture that is still poorly supported.
Face it, Itanium has been a disaster from the start, and it will continue being one. Get used to it.
Slashdot Mirror
Its pretty darn easy to get really fast pipes. Motherboards ship with Gigabit ethernet now, Gigabit switches are way down in price. Most companies these days are building their networks on TCP/IP, this could be a pretty big thing corporate networks, iSCSI, etc. 10GigE isnt all that far away either.
TCP/IP is bigger than the internet these days [admitedly, the server is down so I can't read the article]
Its callled a "slow news day" and "filler". Besides, the number of people who read it the first time around is pretty low. While I admit its hardly "Stuff that matters" we have a hard enough time avoiding repeats every 4 hours, 2 years aint bad.
You sure they weren't just seeing Hyper-threading enabled? While I could certainly accept that this happened for any number of reasons, they are all something of a stretch (no second CPU messed up airflow, causing overheating of the one, the factory ran out of "terminators" and a 2nd Celeron was only a few bucks more? They were EOL'ing that lowest end chip and were blowing out stock, maybe somebody else canceled the order prior to shipment and it was cheaper to "upgrade" their order than sell them "refurbished") Some of the stuff Dell charges extra for cost them almost nothing (enabling RAID on a PE 2x50 usually means adding a 5 cent "jumper key" and a 128MB of RAM, yet they charge $300.
But what ever it is, I doubt its because Dell's production line can't handle the customization.
Microsoft does offer perpetual licenses. Buy a copy of Windows XP and you are licensed to run it forever. What software assurance offers is an entitlement to all upgrades released while your contract is in effect, only Open Source and a few small titles offer upgrades in perpetuity. Plus, many companies already took advantage of these term to upgrade Windows 2000 workstations to Windows XP, so its not as bad as the headline makes out. Then again, I've successfully negotiate terms in my maintenance contracts that they are valid until Product X is released to cover for slippage, in those cases where the manufacturer was attempting to collect for Product X in advance. I wouldn't be surprised to see MS release Windows YA (NT 5.2) as an interim, just to keep folks happy, Sort of a Windows ME for the NT generation.
Of course, we also passed on the killer opportunity MS's Software Assurance offered us. We're not racing to be the first on the block with MS's latest.
I don't buy it. Set the broadcast flag so I can't TiVo my shows anymore and I'm still not going to buy the DVD's, I'm less likely to because I won't "get into" the show in the first place. Major networks will have to rely on me remembering to be home and tuned to their channel when that show who's commercial or write up caught my eye two weeks ago; trust me, that aint going to happen. Instead, I'll go back to watching the discovery channels, FoodTV, Infomercials, oddball cartoons, etc., like I did in the days before Tivo. I'll bitch about their repetivness, though I imagine its a lot better now that there's 40 different Discovery channels. No, if anything this will increase teh need for cable, because I need more options when *I* watch TV, not during that 3 hour band that TV exec's consider "Prime Time". Fun stuff like Myth Buster's, or Iron Chef, or those insane knife auctioning guys (Havent watched them hawk their "collector's knife sets" since I got Tivo).
Here's my idea. If the MPAA is concerned about piracy because of HDTV, don't show the damned movie on TV. If I want to watch a movie these days, I go to block buster, or I'll buy the DVD. Or I watch it on HBO. The damned pirates will just rent the DVD and rip it from there anyway, I doubt they are concerned about getting those last bits of resolution an specially preped HDTV movie copy (1024i vs 480i, I see no reason to convert a 24fps movie to 60fps video) before they compress it down to VCD quality anyway. So unless they movie studios are planning on abandoning the installed base of DVD owners the broadcast flag does them almost 0 good anyway. I imagine given a choice between paying for technology to cripple their TV viewing habits and not watching the content of overly paranoid movie studios, 80% of Americans would opt to pass on the extra content and watch my Big Fat Obnoxious Bride
And here's the kicker. This technology has already been rolled out; check out the MiniDisc player. Now, check out its secret implications: Record your Wedding toast on you're digital MiniDisc recorder, and it will do you the favor of enabling the "do not copy" bit for you. After all, it can't tell that you own all the rights to your speech, so to be safe it assumes you don't (else you could make unlimited digital copies after having gone through just 1 D>A>D conversion, and that would be downright un-American.
If I make of business of compiling facts, I need some means of preventing my clients from reselling these facts and undercutting my business, because like the music industry implies, I'll have only one customer who will then resell that data at a slightly lower price, who will in turn resell that data at a slightly lower price.
Problem is, what if you copyright a database of all the US Senators e-mail addresses. Does that mean I can't gather that publicly available information and publish it without paying you? What is the line where a list of facts becomes a "creative work" deserving a copyright? Can Google claim a copyright to the web, since their Index is a database of "Facts" and "Useful data relationships" forcing other search engines to pay royalties? Does Major League Baseball own a copyright on the Box scores? On Team statistics?
Now, my company relies on collecting "facts" and "establishing useful data relationships", and maybe with the right caveats, exemptions, etc. this might be a useful bill. Problem is we'd have to rely on Congress understanding all the implications of this law on current and future technology, and I just don't think they or anyone else is up to it.
Folks were avoiding the Itanium because it was a disaster; slow and expensive. We've been looking at 64 bit computing for a while, because of the seamless > 4GB RAM capabilities. Intel's PAE extensions are OK, but they really didn't solve any of the problems we were having.
The net result was we went to 64 bit PPC architecture 3 years ago on those critical systems, And everything has been fine. AIX works great, and IBM's embrace of GNU/Linux means an easy learning curve for us Linux users.
Really, what corporate IT types are using his benchmarks anyway?
While nobody else can make "Gillete Ultra Mach3 Turbo Platinum Edition refil blades", many other companies can and do make razor blades, not to mention a number of companies making electric razors. This effectively caps what Gillette can charge for its refils, there is some premium folks will pay for what they perceive brands name quality and superior product is worth, after which they will opt for the Schick Quattro, or maybe the Safeway disposables, or maybe even a nice Braun Electric. Realistically, that $12 you invested in the Mach3 "Razor" isn't trapping you in the Mach3 product very effectively.
Anything else implies either oil companies are needlessly refining Australia's pump gas, or that automotive manufacturers are running radically different engine tunes/compression ratios in Australia. Its a large enough market to justify this, for sure, but I doubt even the magority of cars are so tweaked.
It can be employed against societies or individuals. The big problem I have with it is that it is yet another "thought crime". Its changing the punishment of the crime dependant on the intentions of the criminal. Beat up a guy when you're drunk, it assult and battery. Beat up a guy of another race/sexual preference/shoe size when you're drunk, and its a "Hate Crime". Now sometimes this is good; run a red light and kill someone, its Manslaughter; wait to run the red light until you wife is there, its pre-meditated murder.
Of course, someone who can't understand the concept of past tense isn't likely to have two bits to rub together, so I doubt I'll ever see it. Try to understand this you slack jawed nitwit. Just because I can do something today doesn't mean I could do it yesterday. Did Apple change their policy after the contraversy? Did Apple fail to to notify their support call centers about this option? Will you ever bother to pull you head out of your ass long enough to remember what fresh air smells like?
I don't really care. It would be nice if you spontaneously recognize what an ass you are, then I could feel this little lecture about how time progresses and things change over time wasn't a complete waste of my time, but I doubt I'll get even that much satisfaction.
The issue wasn't that the battery wasn't covered under warranty, I think everyone accepts that batteries, even rechargables, are consumable items, just like the brakes and motor oil in your car. The issue was that Apple wanted hundreds of dollars to replace the battery, making it cost effective to simply buy a new iPod when the battery died.
Someone exploiting venture capitalists? That's like a dog trying to exploit Purina. VCs are in the risk business and are all about exploitation
The use of the word exploitation, and your failure to differentiate "financial types" from VC's, which you still haven't done. You seem to be implying that VC's are exploiters, like pimps trawling the bus stations for desparate vulnrable women.
The tone I am still picking up from you is that VC's should give folks lots of money to try to make their dreams come true, then stay out of it. If the company is successful, they should be happy to get their original investment back, and if the startup owner feels generous, maybe a little extra for their trouble. Sorry, in my mind thats 60's era Hippie ideaology, that other people's resourses should be free for their use, and they should not expect compensation beyond love and appreciation.
If this isn't your premise, then perhaps you should learn to express your ideas clearly, instead of rambling from subject to subject without letting your audiene know the subject has shifted. Why the stupid yet nasty throwaway line about VC's if they weren't the subject of your tirade about greed?
What utter hippie bullshit.
I'm sure in hippie geek land folks would regularly eschew solid investments in established publicly traded companies with years of proven and audited financial results to invest in your harebrained schemes to sell books over the internet, but in the real world, people don't like putting their money in folks hands for a share of a business that is little more than business plan in a pretty binder. VC's use their knowledge to try to identify the rare combination of good business plan with good business people, then invest large sums of money to help "founders" get their ideas off the ground when the founders lack the hundreds of thousands (or even millions) required to get their ideas roling. The mantra was "get big fast" because like lots of great ideas, once someone saw your idea, it was easy to copy, and if you had only attracted a couple thousand people to your site so far, the other guy could accelerate right past you; after a year even those first thousand would realize you had the idea first.
Sure, there was a period when some VC's got richer, though most turned around and plowed it right back into new companies. But the VC's weren't the evil AOL Ad exec's, demanding 50% of a startup's funding; They weren't the Stock promoters yelling buy buy buy when a company couldn't possibly justify the price outside some "New Economy" voodoo. They weren't business school drop-out and two-bit hucksters who decided they wanted to get rich off the whole DotCom scam, who hired freinds into VP jobs they weren't qualified for, who took management off-sites to exotic locations so they could "think outside the box". They didn't tell ordinary people to mortgage their houses to buy more stock in BBQs.com. They worst thing they did was encourage companies to stay in the incestuous Silicon Valley area because they thought the networking was worthwhile, and thats where the real skills were. Most of them were "drinking the Kool-Aid", if they gave bad advice it was because thats what they believed was the right thing to do, not because they were involved in a high tech scam. They were already rich.
Yeah, our VC's are blaming other people for their mistakes now. They shut down other people's DotCom's so they could stem the bleeding, They blamed the CEO for stuff they told him to do then fired him. But he did plenty on his own, and on his way out his concern wasn't our well being, it was "How do I get as big a settlement as I can?" When the time came, our VC's sacraficed to keep us afloat.
So lay off the VC's. They are still out there investing in start ups, which keeps programers from having to take jobs pushing computers at the local Wal*mart.
All in all, this is a very good thing. If nothing else, its kind of hard for other OS's to compete with "The NSA's OS" on security concerns.
The part that tracks all your movements?
This is the tact Slim Shady is taking, which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard, An 8 year old raps a few lyrics and we interpret this as an endorsement by Marshal Mathers? He must think his fans are more peanut brained that most. Does he endorse every numbskull with a boom box sitting on a corner playing his music? Does he worry that I'll see a blood covered 8-foot killer carrying rusty machete with peices of flesh still hanging off and a boom box playing "8-mile" and think "He must be a nice guy, because Eminem endorses him?
Maybe its some dumb publiscist, like the one that went psycho on Gary Layson while Jane was out of the country for writing this cartoon. Jane later said she loved it and apologized to Mr Lawson.
The issue is that these people are using other people's IP to make money. There are situatons where the owner might agree to license the IP for free (or even pay the "player") but its up to the owner to decide that.
Didn't Intel basically include a high performance GigE NIC in all their 865/875 chipset for all those who opted for it? Granted, they aren't laptops, bt there's a ton of these machines out there, the big problem is building a GigE network of sufficient scale.
I think the Million Monkeys might have hit the jackpot
So to use your thumb technique, you have to put the bottom of the remote in your fingers, which will generally put the center of balance of the remote beyond your fingers/hand. If you dont hold tight, it will tend to fall out of your hand; tricky when you need to traverse the entire keypad twice to tune to channel 203. Not that it can't be done, or that with practice it wont become second nature.
I have both, and theres just a night and day difference in the usability of the remote, from using it in a dark room (The peanut remote I have to feel the top to determine the correct end to point at the TV, then find the TV power button clever concealed near the rest of the identical feeling buttons from memory. The Sony remote is obvious by weight and shape which end is which, and the power button is top dead center (yeah, the big SAT button to turn off the Tivo is pretty useless, it would be better as the TV power button, but what you going to do?).
I don't get it. The peanut shaped remote of the Tivo is the worst design ever in my book. I have the Sont T-60 and a Hughes DirecTivo, and I'm waiting for somebody else to put out a new DirecTiVo so I dump the Hughes just because of the remote.
The Sony Remote is easy to tell one end from the other, buttons are distictive to the touch, works well one handed, and its very comfortable.
The peanut controller requires extra work to determine one end from the other, often requires two hands for basic channel entry (The buttons are at the bottom, so one han must hold while the other pushes), and lacks tactile feedback to help you locate buttons. I suspect this article was written by some chowder-head who never used a really good remote, and was just impressed by the fact that anything more than "We need three buttons, labeled A B and C" went in to remore design.
Worst part is, I think they are attached to this design as part of a "branding" thing. At least they have abandoned the god awful front panel design that plagued their units for years.
And maintains its VLIW architecture that is still poorly supported.
Face it, Itanium has been a disaster from the start, and it will continue being one. Get used to it.