We're in tight economic times. Companies are not going to upgrade unless they have a real need for a new feature. I have several clients who are still running on Windows XP and have absolutely no need to change that. Same goes for Vista. If their current systems are running smoothly and meeting requirements, there is no reason to change things.
The only reason I'm upgrading at least one of my machines is because my clients expect me to be informed about the latest versions, whether they themselves are actually using them or not.
If online radio has to pay, and satellite has to pay (for those of you who didn't know that, they do), then broadcast radio should also have to pay.
Broadcast radio keeps insisting what they want is a level playing field. Well, it ain't level if they don't have to pay.
No in between bullshit, all commercial broadcasters should be treated the same, regardless of the actual method of broadcast...either charge no one, or charge everyone.
Next time your local government does something that adversely affects you and you feel it totally sucks, think about how that lack of interest among you and the community contributes to that. I'm not saying its all your fault or anything like that. But people who don't take an interest in the goings-on in their community usually end up living in a horrid city with the kind of government they deserve.
The problem is most traditional media outlets aren't doing that style of journalism any more. They fire as many of their local people as they can, and rely even more on AP and the intarwebs. Instead of bringing me in-depth local news that I can't get anywhere else and would be willing to pay for, they bring me news that I can find in 470 other locations for free.
I have to wonder if the Chrome OS is going to turn out like Android has so far. When Android was first announced and also when it was first released, pundits claimed Android phones were going to take over the market, and everyone and their mother supposedly announced they were going to release piles of new Android-based phones.
And here we are now and in reality there are very few Android phones on the market, and Android phones seems to be largely absent from all the big cellphone shows.
So I have my doubts that Chrome is going to be the Next Big Thing.
I think this got her in to more trouble Thursday than anything. I've served on juries. Nothing pisses a juror off like being talked to like they're stupid and ignorant.
Actually, no its not too late to settle. Even after the verdict was in Thursday, the RIAA mouthpieces said they were open to a settlement. They know they will never collect $1.92 million, and they also know what kind of bad press it will get them if they pursue an award like that. It would be in their interest as much as hers to settle now for a few grand. They got back to back wins in jury trials, that's all the RIAA really cares about.
The lawyers, no matter how good, were up against one major obstacle during both trials. And that obstacle is that the evidence overwhelmingly said she was guilty of what they were accusing her of.
I don't like the RIAA either. And I also think this award is even more silly than the last one. But that makes two juries now that have found this twit guilty. Its time for her to fess up, quit trying to play the victim, and settle for a few thousand dollars.
And if the intarwebs community wants to be taken seriously in their fight for reasonable copyright laws, they need to find a better case to rally around. One where the accused person really is innocent. Continuing to support Jammie Thomas-Whateveritis only makes us look like stupid pirates.
What you're missing is that she's already been found guilty once. And even though Media Sentry and the RIAA suck and I hate to see them win, a lot of tech savvy people, myself included, thinks the evidence shows she's guilty.
Maybe I'll be surprised and her new defense will pull a rabbit out of the hat and something good will come out of this trial. But this is not the ideal case for everyone to rally around.
My bad...I misread your processor description...I thought you said 8-core. My answer is still correct though, I just used the wrong number of copies. They can run one copy per core, and the copies cannot exchange information.
Do they realize that they can put eight quad-core xeons in a machine and finish the calculation in a single shift instead of waiting a month?
No, they can't. Each iteration of the software requires the results of the previous iteration. It cannot easily be made to run like you want on multiple cores. The best they could do on the processor you describe is run 8 separate copies of the application, each taking one month to run...they could test 8 numbers at once, but they cannot test one number 8 times as fast.
The irony of it being a cable organization complaining about this is cable (and satellite) companies do the *exact same thing* with cable programming like ESPN...the large expense (ESPN is one of the more expensive programming packages) of a cable system getting ESPN is passed on to almost all of their subscribers, whether they want to watch it or not. And in some cases whether they even subscribe to a tier that includes ESPN programming or not. Its kind of funny to watch them get a taste of their own medicine. This is one of those proverbial pot and kettle situations.
I've made similar comments to this case in the past, as recently as yesterday. While I despise the RIAA and think they are a perfect example of how not to conduct business, at the same time its obvious from the evidence of the first trial that Jamie [what ever her last name is this week] did in fact infringe copyright. Thus I have a very hard time wanting to root for her side. I wish the Slashdot community could have found a better case to rally around.
This case brings me very mixed feelings. On the one hand, the RIAA (and to a lessor extent, the MPAA) needs to have its ass seriously kicked.
But on the other hand, I wish this was a case where the defendant wasn't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial. It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer. Its a good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.
I have a Twitter account that I used mainly to follow IT industry talking heads that I like to keep up with. I even managed to tweet every day or two myself.
I haven't been back to Twitter since the day Oprah sent her first Tweet.
Apple/AT&T release a new phone and only new customers and customers with contracts about to end get it for upgrade pricing. Others are crying.
Guess what, cry babies...that's just like every other carrier in the US does. Its the industry standard here. Why did you expect different from AT&T and His Holiness Lord Steve? Contrary to what you think, you are not better than everyone else. Welcome to the real world.
It doesn't matter that the headline is worded funny, because the majority of you responding so far obviously did not RTFA. But then why should I be surprised, this being Slashdot and all.
If you had read the article, you would know that the hospital only requested that ambulances *in route to the hospital* reroute to other area hospitals (and Indianapolis has no shortage of hospitals). Patients who were already there were not turned away, and patients who showed up using methods other than ambulances were not turned away.
So then I assume you are equally opposed to venture capitalists who provide money for companies to get started and "speculate" that the company will make it big, thus providing them a return on that investment. Stock holders do the same thing.
Projects like this have to make a choice. It can scale hugely and be 99.9999 (nothing is 100) percent reliable, or it can be free. It can't be both, unless you have a really supportive multimillionaire as part of your project. Its a basic fact of life that large amounts of bandwidth and large amounts of storage cost real money.
This is, in my opinion, the basic stumbling block of free projects that require lots of resources of one form or another. I don't know that a serious study has actually been done, but I'd be willing to bet that the majority of people who use FOSS use it not because they hate Microsoft or because they support "open", but because they get it for free.
True. But on the other hand, Microsoft may not want to comment about their pricing structure to large OEMs when their retail copies are priced like they are.
In reading these comments, its amazing how many of you actually believe that Dell (or any other top-tier PC maker) pays anything even near retail for any Microsoft OS.
I know for a fact that back in the days before Vista when XP was still king that HP was typically paying Microsoft $35 a copy. I'm sure Dell gets a similar discount, and I'm sure they aren't paying any more than $60 or so a copy now.
In addition, the makers of all that shitware that comes preinstalled on your new PC pays Dell a fee for putting it there. That's another reason that getting Linux on a PC from Dell would not necessarily reduce your price.
This sounds to me like Dell wants to raise prices and increase their margins (which are currently very thin in the PC industry), and this is a cool way to blame it on Microsoft. They simply don't have the balls to say "Dell needs to make more profit".
Slashdot Mirror
We're in tight economic times. Companies are not going to upgrade unless they have a real need for a new feature. I have several clients who are still running on Windows XP and have absolutely no need to change that. Same goes for Vista. If their current systems are running smoothly and meeting requirements, there is no reason to change things.
The only reason I'm upgrading at least one of my machines is because my clients expect me to be informed about the latest versions, whether they themselves are actually using them or not.
If online radio has to pay, and satellite has to pay (for those of you who didn't know that, they do), then broadcast radio should also have to pay.
Broadcast radio keeps insisting what they want is a level playing field. Well, it ain't level if they don't have to pay.
No in between bullshit, all commercial broadcasters should be treated the same, regardless of the actual method of broadcast...either charge no one, or charge everyone.
Next time your local government does something that adversely affects you and you feel it totally sucks, think about how that lack of interest among you and the community contributes to that. I'm not saying its all your fault or anything like that. But people who don't take an interest in the goings-on in their community usually end up living in a horrid city with the kind of government they deserve.
The problem is most traditional media outlets aren't doing that style of journalism any more. They fire as many of their local people as they can, and rely even more on AP and the intarwebs. Instead of bringing me in-depth local news that I can't get anywhere else and would be willing to pay for, they bring me news that I can find in 470 other locations for free.
I have to wonder if the Chrome OS is going to turn out like Android has so far. When Android was first announced and also when it was first released, pundits claimed Android phones were going to take over the market, and everyone and their mother supposedly announced they were going to release piles of new Android-based phones.
And here we are now and in reality there are very few Android phones on the market, and Android phones seems to be largely absent from all the big cellphone shows.
So I have my doubts that Chrome is going to be the Next Big Thing.
I think this got her in to more trouble Thursday than anything. I've served on juries. Nothing pisses a juror off like being talked to like they're stupid and ignorant.
Actually, no its not too late to settle. Even after the verdict was in Thursday, the RIAA mouthpieces said they were open to a settlement. They know they will never collect $1.92 million, and they also know what kind of bad press it will get them if they pursue an award like that. It would be in their interest as much as hers to settle now for a few grand. They got back to back wins in jury trials, that's all the RIAA really cares about.
The lawyers, no matter how good, were up against one major obstacle during both trials. And that obstacle is that the evidence overwhelmingly said she was guilty of what they were accusing her of.
I don't like the RIAA either. And I also think this award is even more silly than the last one. But that makes two juries now that have found this twit guilty. Its time for her to fess up, quit trying to play the victim, and settle for a few thousand dollars.
And if the intarwebs community wants to be taken seriously in their fight for reasonable copyright laws, they need to find a better case to rally around. One where the accused person really is innocent. Continuing to support Jammie Thomas-Whateveritis only makes us look like stupid pirates.
What you're missing is that she's already been found guilty once. And even though Media Sentry and the RIAA suck and I hate to see them win, a lot of tech savvy people, myself included, thinks the evidence shows she's guilty.
Maybe I'll be surprised and her new defense will pull a rabbit out of the hat and something good will come out of this trial. But this is not the ideal case for everyone to rally around.
My bad...I misread your processor description...I thought you said 8-core. My answer is still correct though, I just used the wrong number of copies. They can run one copy per core, and the copies cannot exchange information.
Do they realize that they can put eight quad-core xeons in a machine and finish the calculation in a single shift instead of waiting a month?
No, they can't. Each iteration of the software requires the results of the previous iteration. It cannot easily be made to run like you want on multiple cores. The best they could do on the processor you describe is run 8 separate copies of the application, each taking one month to run...they could test 8 numbers at once, but they cannot test one number 8 times as fast.
The irony of it being a cable organization complaining about this is cable (and satellite) companies do the *exact same thing* with cable programming like ESPN...the large expense (ESPN is one of the more expensive programming packages) of a cable system getting ESPN is passed on to almost all of their subscribers, whether they want to watch it or not. And in some cases whether they even subscribe to a tier that includes ESPN programming or not. Its kind of funny to watch them get a taste of their own medicine. This is one of those proverbial pot and kettle situations.
As the saying goes, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime.
She made her choice, and now she has to face the consequences.
I've made similar comments to this case in the past, as recently as yesterday. While I despise the RIAA and think they are a perfect example of how not to conduct business, at the same time its obvious from the evidence of the first trial that Jamie [what ever her last name is this week] did in fact infringe copyright. Thus I have a very hard time wanting to root for her side. I wish the Slashdot community could have found a better case to rally around.
This case brings me very mixed feelings. On the one hand, the RIAA (and to a lessor extent, the MPAA) needs to have its ass seriously kicked.
But on the other hand, I wish this was a case where the defendant wasn't so obviously guilty of what the RIAA claimed in the first trial. It sucks that this isn't one of the cases where the RIAA went after a senior citizen who doesn't even know hot to turn on a computer. Its a good thing that the RIAA is so evil and stupid, because otherwise I'd find it much harder to root for her side.
I have a Twitter account that I used mainly to follow IT industry talking heads that I like to keep up with. I even managed to tweet every day or two myself.
I haven't been back to Twitter since the day Oprah sent her first Tweet.
I use Comcast and OpenDNS. Everything is as it should be here (central Indiana).
I use EasyNews to get my pr0...um...er...oh...make that 'I heard EasyNews is good'.
What the hell, I've got Karma to burn...
Apple/AT&T release a new phone and only new customers and customers with contracts about to end get it for upgrade pricing. Others are crying.
Guess what, cry babies...that's just like every other carrier in the US does. Its the industry standard here. Why did you expect different from AT&T and His Holiness Lord Steve? Contrary to what you think, you are not better than everyone else. Welcome to the real world.
It doesn't matter that the headline is worded funny, because the majority of you responding so far obviously did not RTFA. But then why should I be surprised, this being Slashdot and all.
If you had read the article, you would know that the hospital only requested that ambulances *in route to the hospital* reroute to other area hospitals (and Indianapolis has no shortage of hospitals). Patients who were already there were not turned away, and patients who showed up using methods other than ambulances were not turned away.
So then I assume you are equally opposed to venture capitalists who provide money for companies to get started and "speculate" that the company will make it big, thus providing them a return on that investment. Stock holders do the same thing.
Capitalism cannot exist without speculation.
But what if laptops routinely had a GPS receiver onboard
The tinfoil hat crowd would cry privacy invasion.
and possibly also a GSM/UMTS modem?
The cost of the laptop would increase, and we'd all have to buy monthly data packages from a cellular provider.
Projects like this have to make a choice. It can scale hugely and be 99.9999 (nothing is 100) percent reliable, or it can be free. It can't be both, unless you have a really supportive multimillionaire as part of your project. Its a basic fact of life that large amounts of bandwidth and large amounts of storage cost real money.
This is, in my opinion, the basic stumbling block of free projects that require lots of resources of one form or another. I don't know that a serious study has actually been done, but I'd be willing to bet that the majority of people who use FOSS use it not because they hate Microsoft or because they support "open", but because they get it for free.
True. But on the other hand, Microsoft may not want to comment about their pricing structure to large OEMs when their retail copies are priced like they are.
In reading these comments, its amazing how many of you actually believe that Dell (or any other top-tier PC maker) pays anything even near retail for any Microsoft OS.
I know for a fact that back in the days before Vista when XP was still king that HP was typically paying Microsoft $35 a copy. I'm sure Dell gets a similar discount, and I'm sure they aren't paying any more than $60 or so a copy now.
In addition, the makers of all that shitware that comes preinstalled on your new PC pays Dell a fee for putting it there. That's another reason that getting Linux on a PC from Dell would not necessarily reduce your price.
This sounds to me like Dell wants to raise prices and increase their margins (which are currently very thin in the PC industry), and this is a cool way to blame it on Microsoft. They simply don't have the balls to say "Dell needs to make more profit".