Not to mention, the amount of stock that SCO executives have sold off (in plain sight, no less) should be triggering some sort of warning light at a federal level. Why aren't the feds investigating this yet?
Or, rather, "The only people we are going to try and charge for Linux right now are the people with enough money to pay a (relatively small) license and not care enough to sue us into oblivion."
Re:Bluetooth will take off like USB did
on
Is Bluetooth Dead?
·
· Score: 1
Indeed, but it seems that with the ever lowering prices of 802.11b devices and the continued minaturization / reduction in power consumption, not to mention, the vastly larger support for 802.11b, Bluetooth could also go the way of the MiniDisc!
Not to mention, the rate at which data can be moved is much lesser so, it is certainly appropriate for moving compact bits of data (certainly useful for syncing a phone with another device), but can it survive in several years when the amount of data being moved back and forth is potentially tremendously larger (digital photos, videos, etc.)?
I'm on FSU's campus in my office and through our LAN can't BARELY even reach the poor piece of fried silicon art we're creating on that machine right now! Perhaps they'll scan the smoldering processor from that box soon and show us a big/. image etched right on it;)
You should have read the Investor BS, it stated how the company has made exactly jack shit for money so far, and, even their CEO acknowledges that buying their stock is so risky you can lose your entire investment! That was the most entertaining part to me!
http://www.sunncomm.com/disclaimer.asp
Oh, and if you turn off ActiveX controls their site disappears. I guess that's circumvention too... then I can use the "View Source" hack to see the shoddy javascript and HTML that led to this break in security (or just no alternate content, not even a "Download Flash Here" page).
Don't worry, they couldn't sue themselves (they'd have to borrow even more money). This is a completely pointless threat! Their web site pulls up a disclaimer upon loading that informs you that the company hasn't made any money (probably up to their eyebrows in debt) and they're under their rights not to report to any stock purchasers just how much they've lost until they break even (if ever). The CEO of the company acknowledges that buying their stock is a risk of losing your entire investment in it.
How are they so concerned about their 20% loss in stock value when they warn their own shareholders that they're buying a volatile stock in a company that hasn't made any money and they don't want to tell you how much they've lost and/or owe? What damage exactly has this kid done to their reputation?!? They don't have one!
Not to mention, someone should sue them for false advertising. Their web site claims that their technology is "Lightyears Beyond ENCRYPTION". If I was BMG or the RIAA, I'd sue them to recover every penny I paid them to include security technology on their CD's that can be circumvented by simply holding down the Shift key!
Their website has it's own equally effective security feature.... Much like the Shift key with their Audio CD security, if you disable flash (ActiveX in IE, plug-ins elsewhere) it simply disappears (no alternate content if you block flash)! Perhaps if someone disables the DMCA these absurd lawsuits will also disappear (one can dream, right?).
I'm surprised that Microsoft hasn't sued VeriSign over this yet... after all, they were at it with Internet Explorer long before VeriSign tried it. What about the business Microsoft is losing because of this to their MSN Search paid advertisements?
I guess all we have to do is wait until MS sues the pants off them (or just buys them, which might be cheaper (to MS, anyway)) and we can get right back to sending most people's typo traffic to MSN Search!
I think a more reliable solution would be to firewall off ISP's from the VeriSign IP (and, then keep firewalling off the IPs they switch to when that doesn't work), and maybe firewall off the web site that MSN search sends people to!
And, contrary to the Original Poster of this article, Microsoft is NOT (entirely) locking out compatibility. It will only apply to ONE mode of saving your documents using DRM.
Incidentally, this will also require Win2k3 Server to run and, as such, Active Directory, etc., heavily deployed network-wide. Though it's not impossible, it's less likely that OpenOffice, etc., will have a heavy usage in such a business or organization (deploying such large amounts of MS technologies).
Of course, if compatibility becomes an issue for that business or organization, much like the recent competing.ZIP formats, they can simply NOT use the new feature and retain compatibility.
The problem becomes, if your organization REQUIRES you (the end user) to use the DRM features to create, exchange, or view documents. Then they take away your choice to use alternatives to MS Office. In which case, some of the blame may fall squarely on the organization's bureaucracy for making such a choice (likely against tech advice from their subordinates).
Is this legal? I mean, can they get away with this once the courts decide that they're full of shit? If a person buys an IP license fee and then the courts decide that no such IP license exists, wouldn't he or she be legally entitled to a refund?
Well, no, because technically you were robbed. Someone asked you for your money, threatened you, and basically swindled you out of it. You are not "entitled" to your money back. (You are morally, of course, but a company that tries to swindle you in this way clearly has thrown those concerns for you out the window already).
IANAL but it seems to me that their punishment could be determined in court if they are sued by your company (and, if you win in court). You can probably file criminal charges against specific individuals if you have names, though most likely you'd be more successful suing the company in general (since they are the ones taking your money, not the specific individual threatening you, (s)he is just acting on behalf of his/her company). Then you can (try to) get damages from them in court.
That's assuming that there's any money or company left to sue after Big Blue finishes them off in court, which seems unlikely.
Windows security, (don't laugh) on NT 5 and up is not too shabby (when properly done... not to say that it is "secure", no systems plugged into electricity and a network are). The problem is not the security model, it's the default level of security applied out of the box. The default level is so lax, it is WISHING it were swiss cheese!
There are so many open orifices by default, it's, honestly, frightening to release a Windows system to the wild of being connected to the Internet without extensive preventative measures. Of course, keeping safe in a Windows environment is very possible but almost exclusively for technically savvy people, the rest of the Windows users (almost all of them) are running Windows with it's default pants down, bent over, with a giant neon "Rape Me" sign on them.
Sigh. Perhaps someday MS will enable some more of their security features BY DEFAULT on Windows (well, lets say, all of them, and then let users drop their computer's drawers if they choose to). Until then, look at it this way... MS's (deliberate?) default swiss cheese security keeps many a person employed plugging the holes.
If it were secure by default and kept itself in great working order automatically, what use would anyone have paying techies to do that? In a strange way, I owe my continued employment to MS's poor default practices.
And, to make matters worse, they have to find a way to protect against the added radiation of the Nuclear Reactor they're shipping up there!
I imagine that the costs of shipping the protective radiation shielding materials alone for a Nuclear Reactor might be prohibitive (because of the weight of the materials).
One possibility would be to build the reactor a "safe" distance away from the habitats and run some sort of power lines out to it.
Of course, with Mars now so close to the Earth and putting on such a spectacular show, we can only imagine how much prettier a show it would be with a Russian Nuclear Reactor on the surface!
This is interesting because, initially, worms were mechanisms to install software (in a distributed computing type of model) across networks with slow connections (or was it updates?).
It would be interesting if technology like this were used by administrators to distribute patches to people whose machines have become infected with other viruses...
Since people never bother to install patches when told to but ALWAYS "install" the latest versions of viruses, this may be an interesting new way to distribute pre-emptive patches or solutions for removing infections from machines.
Well it looks like the day of Netscape's execution is nigh, but I wonder, with the formation of the Mozilla Foundation, why doesn't AOL donate the Netscape trademarks to the foundation.
Though Netscape has been increasingly marginalized, I think from a sheer brand name recognition point of view, if Mozilla, or Mozilla Firebird become Netscape, they will have a much easier time entering the collective conscious of many more people out there.
I tried Mozilla Firebird 0.6 for the first time yesterday and have to say I was very impressed! It was Netscape and Mozilla minus all the bloat, as advertised. If a Netscape 8 label is thrown on this and the usual barrage of AOL advertisements doesn't install with it, it could have a great chance of siezing some market share from the stagnating Explorer 6.
Of course, AOL will likely keep the Netscape trademark and simply let it get full of dust bunnies (as a portal web site no one will go to) to the point where no one remembers it anymore.... but if they'd only donate it to the Mozilla Foundation... it at least seems like a reach around for the current and future rounds of Netscape employees being fired.
that Conservatives stood for smaller government... surely creating equipment to monitor each street in the country (because it seems to me it'd be a lot easier to install cameras, or use existing ones in our own cities rather than it would be to send technicians out to a war zone and start installing cameras while people are shooting at you!) is the opposite of that.
As a matter of fact, the first time you do something "erratic" or "suspicious" to the computer system and it sends a police car to follow you around and/or arrest or harrass you, you will be so glad we live in a free country that is just protecting us from terrorists.
I'm in my late 20's so I still get harrassed often by police because young men often look suspicious to police because of our age and when we do suspicious things such as drive around or walk. Just last week I was followed around my apartment complex all the way to my house because I looked suspicious... I was going to ask the officer what the problem was but unfortunately there is no way to question my local police...
Once I tried talking to one as he was about to follow me into my gated apartment complex (a separate incident) after he unsuccessfully tried to guess a gate code for a few minutes rather than using the emergency code (because he really just wanted to drive around and harrass people and had no reason to be there). I told him, very politely, actually, because a friend of mine who is a policeman in Ft. Lauderdale that was visiting me was in the car with me, "Sir, please use your gate code". He then almost broke down the gate with the car that my taxes in part paid for and screamed (at the top of his lungs and in a very inappropriately rude and loud response to a very calm statement on my part (I have a witness)) "Boy, move your car or I'm gonna arrest you and kick your A**". After being threatened by the cop, my Policeman buddy explained to me that, though the cop was being a prick, was absolutely wrong, was trying to break into my neighborhood (there is an emergency gate code for official police business he did not use and the fact that he was trying for about five minutes to guess a resident gate code so it wouldn't be on the record that he used the emergency code for no emergency), and threatened to beat the crap out of me, I better let him in because I should show him some respect.
After this incident, I am afraid to speak to police because, in their line of work my friend told me, they are suspicious of everyone for their own safety. That's fine, and I think wise, but there is a serious difference between being overly cautious and suspicious and beind downright disrespectful, threatening, and harassing young people and minorities because we all "look suspicious". Perhaps I should spray paint my hair grey so I don't "look suspicious" anymore.
I know my experiences with police have been extremely mild in comparison with other people's experiences, fortunately for me, I never was up to no good when encountering police. Well, this is certainly an off-topic rant, but it goes to show how enthusiastic I am to be visually followed around a city, marked as "suspicious" because I'm young, then pinpointed for harrassment by the police.
Surely there are more respectful ways to treat americans!
Very true, but I think in reality AOL will simply drop Netscape. There is just no resurrecting it, no matter how hard they (AOL) try. Mozilla will live on, of course, but after signing a seven year deal for IE in AOL, AOL all but signed Netscape's death warrant. They're probably currently deciding how much of it to use as a tax write off.
On the other hand, perhaps AOL is waiting for Firebird before deciding whether to completely do away with Netscape... They could give Firebird some fancy Netscape branding and call the whole affair Netscape 8 for its last shot, but really, the fact that they won't even bundle it with AOL should be telling of just how high they rate its chances of survival.
I think Firebird will probably emerge as the best contender. Packaging it with Netscape branding will at least take advantage of a familiar brand name for people! That might be its best hope. Of course, the one small problem still remains... though the author of the article squarely calls IE 6 Dead, it is still (and you better believe will continue to be until a court order pries it out of MS's hand) the default, pre-installed web browser on Windows.
Any browser that comes out without that kind of pull will, no matter how much better than IE 6, be just a contender (unless the courts allow competition...).
Very true:) I was just poking fun at the fact that IBM is now the sole producer of Apple's Power PCs... it seems like a long time for moto (but they brought it on themselves with their stagnation). Besides, the whole Apple vs. IBM PC (of the mid-1980's) I was poking fun at seems so long ago now (gosh, I feel old)!
As for hating big corporations (ala IBM or Microsoft), I don't really like to harbor any hatred toward companies. Though they (and don't mistake, they ALL) make scummy business moves, I find hating one company instead of another rather fan-boyish behavior that seems rampant of late.
It seems that so many people I run into are fixated on hating a certain Washington state company, and that's fine and dandy, but don't forget that ALL publically traded companies are out to do the same thing MS has done... make a ridiculous amount of money for their shareholders and drive anyone else they can out of business. Otherwise, companies would be selling products at cost, which doesn't happen, in the U.S. at least.
I really don't believe that if any other company were in MS's position they would behave any more or less ethically. That much money is an ultimate corrupter, especially when you have a greedy board of directors crying for MORE, MORE.
I suppose one of the problems with benchmarking on Windows with GCC is that GCC does not run NATIVELY on Windows... you need to run it on top of Cygwin or MinGW.
That alone will make the performance hit that Wosniak was talking about. It's strange business benchmarking across two entirely different processors. I think they've done the best possible to balance the scales by using GCC on OSX and Linux (where it can run natively). Maybe they should have run the Dells on a similar to OSX's BSD build for x86 (maybe Darwin, though it's probably not optimized as much for x86) to get even closer to normalizing the benchmark (if it's really possible). Though, I think Linux on workstations is more realisting in the real world than BSD on x86 workstations so it's pretty fair.
In any case, if the 3Ghz G5 happens on the schedule stated by Steve Jobs, the Powermacs running dual 3Ghz G5's should be head and shoulders above the current Intel-based offerings. Of course, we'll have to wait and see what Intel and AMD have available by then.
You know, processor benchmarking is just a geek way of saying "mine is bigger than...". I think it's great that Apple's really back in the performance game, it can only help everyone by re-lighting a fire under Intel, IBM, and AMD to innovate in a contest for (temporary) bragging rights.
Ya know, it's a very strange day when the Apple faithful are getting a raging hard-on from a new IBM processor! I'm wearing my Apocalypse-proof suit until August, just in case.
The discounts are consistent with previous Apple academic discounts. These are the same configurations as the corresponding non-educational priced retail systems:
Slashdot Mirror
Not to mention, the amount of stock that SCO executives have sold off (in plain sight, no less) should be triggering some sort of warning light at a federal level. Why aren't the feds investigating this yet?
Or, rather, "The only people we are going to try and charge for Linux right now are the people with enough money to pay a (relatively small) license and not care enough to sue us into oblivion."
Indeed, but it seems that with the ever lowering prices of 802.11b devices and the continued minaturization / reduction in power consumption, not to mention, the vastly larger support for 802.11b, Bluetooth could also go the way of the MiniDisc!
Not to mention, the rate at which data can be moved is much lesser so, it is certainly appropriate for moving compact bits of data (certainly useful for syncing a phone with another device), but can it survive in several years when the amount of data being moved back and forth is potentially tremendously larger (digital photos, videos, etc.)?
Of course, no one I know has a magic future seeing thinking cap thingee so we'll just have to wait and see!
Have mercy, this poor server is a little Wintel box running IIS 5 on Win2k!
I'm on FSU's campus in my office and through our LAN can't BARELY even reach the poor piece of fried silicon art we're creating on that machine right now! Perhaps they'll scan the smoldering processor from that box soon and show us a big /. image etched right on it ;)
You should have read the Investor BS, it stated how the company has made exactly jack shit for money so far, and, even their CEO acknowledges that buying their stock is so risky you can lose your entire investment! That was the most entertaining part to me!
http://www.sunncomm.com/disclaimer.asp
Oh, and if you turn off ActiveX controls their site disappears. I guess that's circumvention too... then I can use the "View Source" hack to see the shoddy javascript and HTML that led to this break in security (or just no alternate content, not even a "Download Flash Here" page).
Don't worry, they couldn't sue themselves (they'd have to borrow even more money). This is a completely pointless threat! Their web site pulls up a disclaimer upon loading that informs you that the company hasn't made any money (probably up to their eyebrows in debt) and they're under their rights not to report to any stock purchasers just how much they've lost until they break even (if ever). The CEO of the company acknowledges that buying their stock is a risk of losing your entire investment in it.
How are they so concerned about their 20% loss in stock value when they warn their own shareholders that they're buying a volatile stock in a company that hasn't made any money and they don't want to tell you how much they've lost and/or owe? What damage exactly has this kid done to their reputation?!? They don't have one!
Not to mention, someone should sue them for false advertising. Their web site claims that their technology is "Lightyears Beyond ENCRYPTION". If I was BMG or the RIAA, I'd sue them to recover every penny I paid them to include security technology on their CD's that can be circumvented by simply holding down the Shift key!
Their website has it's own equally effective security feature.... Much like the Shift key with their Audio CD security, if you disable flash (ActiveX in IE, plug-ins elsewhere) it simply disappears (no alternate content if you block flash)! Perhaps if someone disables the DMCA these absurd lawsuits will also disappear (one can dream, right?).
Last time I checked Openoffice was capable of this.
I'm surprised that Microsoft hasn't sued VeriSign over this yet... after all, they were at it with Internet Explorer long before VeriSign tried it. What about the business Microsoft is losing because of this to their MSN Search paid advertisements?
I guess all we have to do is wait until MS sues the pants off them (or just buys them, which might be cheaper (to MS, anyway)) and we can get right back to sending most people's typo traffic to MSN Search!
I think a more reliable solution would be to firewall off ISP's from the VeriSign IP (and, then keep firewalling off the IPs they switch to when that doesn't work), and maybe firewall off the web site that MSN search sends people to!
Here's an unrelated observation I've made to what you said...
Most of the American flags I've seen flying from cars are on German or Japanese cars!
And, contrary to the Original Poster of this article, Microsoft is NOT (entirely) locking out compatibility. It will only apply to ONE mode of saving your documents using DRM.
.ZIP formats, they can simply NOT use the new feature and retain compatibility.
Incidentally, this will also require Win2k3 Server to run and, as such, Active Directory, etc., heavily deployed network-wide. Though it's not impossible, it's less likely that OpenOffice, etc., will have a heavy usage in such a business or organization (deploying such large amounts of MS technologies).
Of course, if compatibility becomes an issue for that business or organization, much like the recent competing
The problem becomes, if your organization REQUIRES you (the end user) to use the DRM features to create, exchange, or view documents. Then they take away your choice to use alternatives to MS Office. In which case, some of the blame may fall squarely on the organization's bureaucracy for making such a choice (likely against tech advice from their subordinates).
Well, no, because technically you were robbed. Someone asked you for your money, threatened you, and basically swindled you out of it. You are not "entitled" to your money back. (You are morally, of course, but a company that tries to swindle you in this way clearly has thrown those concerns for you out the window already).
IANAL but it seems to me that their punishment could be determined in court if they are sued by your company (and, if you win in court). You can probably file criminal charges against specific individuals if you have names, though most likely you'd be more successful suing the company in general (since they are the ones taking your money, not the specific individual threatening you, (s)he is just acting on behalf of his/her company). Then you can (try to) get damages from them in court.
That's assuming that there's any money or company left to sue after Big Blue finishes them off in court, which seems unlikely.
Windows security, (don't laugh) on NT 5 and up is not too shabby (when properly done... not to say that it is "secure", no systems plugged into electricity and a network are). The problem is not the security model, it's the default level of security applied out of the box. The default level is so lax, it is WISHING it were swiss cheese!
There are so many open orifices by default, it's, honestly, frightening to release a Windows system to the wild of being connected to the Internet without extensive preventative measures. Of course, keeping safe in a Windows environment is very possible but almost exclusively for technically savvy people, the rest of the Windows users (almost all of them) are running Windows with it's default pants down, bent over, with a giant neon "Rape Me" sign on them.
Sigh. Perhaps someday MS will enable some more of their security features BY DEFAULT on Windows (well, lets say, all of them, and then let users drop their computer's drawers if they choose to). Until then, look at it this way... MS's (deliberate?) default swiss cheese security keeps many a person employed plugging the holes.
If it were secure by default and kept itself in great working order automatically, what use would anyone have paying techies to do that? In a strange way, I owe my continued employment to MS's poor default practices.
I imagine that the costs of shipping the protective radiation shielding materials alone for a Nuclear Reactor might be prohibitive (because of the weight of the materials).
One possibility would be to build the reactor a "safe" distance away from the habitats and run some sort of power lines out to it.
Of course, with Mars now so close to the Earth and putting on such a spectacular show, we can only imagine how much prettier a show it would be with a Russian Nuclear Reactor on the surface!
This is interesting because, initially, worms were mechanisms to install software (in a distributed computing type of model) across networks with slow connections (or was it updates?).
It would be interesting if technology like this were used by administrators to distribute patches to people whose machines have become infected with other viruses...
Since people never bother to install patches when told to but ALWAYS "install" the latest versions of viruses, this may be an interesting new way to distribute pre-emptive patches or solutions for removing infections from machines.
Well it looks like the day of Netscape's execution is nigh, but I wonder, with the formation of the Mozilla Foundation, why doesn't AOL donate the Netscape trademarks to the foundation.
Though Netscape has been increasingly marginalized, I think from a sheer brand name recognition point of view, if Mozilla, or Mozilla Firebird become Netscape, they will have a much easier time entering the collective conscious of many more people out there.
I tried Mozilla Firebird 0.6 for the first time yesterday and have to say I was very impressed! It was Netscape and Mozilla minus all the bloat, as advertised. If a Netscape 8 label is thrown on this and the usual barrage of AOL advertisements doesn't install with it, it could have a great chance of siezing some market share from the stagnating Explorer 6.
Of course, AOL will likely keep the Netscape trademark and simply let it get full of dust bunnies (as a portal web site no one will go to) to the point where no one remembers it anymore.... but if they'd only donate it to the Mozilla Foundation... it at least seems like a reach around for the current and future rounds of Netscape employees being fired.
that Conservatives stood for smaller government... surely creating equipment to monitor each street in the country (because it seems to me it'd be a lot easier to install cameras, or use existing ones in our own cities rather than it would be to send technicians out to a war zone and start installing cameras while people are shooting at you!) is the opposite of that.
As a matter of fact, the first time you do something "erratic" or "suspicious" to the computer system and it sends a police car to follow you around and/or arrest or harrass you, you will be so glad we live in a free country that is just protecting us from terrorists.
I'm in my late 20's so I still get harrassed often by police because young men often look suspicious to police because of our age and when we do suspicious things such as drive around or walk. Just last week I was followed around my apartment complex all the way to my house because I looked suspicious... I was going to ask the officer what the problem was but unfortunately there is no way to question my local police...
Once I tried talking to one as he was about to follow me into my gated apartment complex (a separate incident) after he unsuccessfully tried to guess a gate code for a few minutes rather than using the emergency code (because he really just wanted to drive around and harrass people and had no reason to be there). I told him, very politely, actually, because a friend of mine who is a policeman in Ft. Lauderdale that was visiting me was in the car with me, "Sir, please use your gate code". He then almost broke down the gate with the car that my taxes in part paid for and screamed (at the top of his lungs and in a very inappropriately rude and loud response to a very calm statement on my part (I have a witness)) "Boy, move your car or I'm gonna arrest you and kick your A**". After being threatened by the cop, my Policeman buddy explained to me that, though the cop was being a prick, was absolutely wrong, was trying to break into my neighborhood (there is an emergency gate code for official police business he did not use and the fact that he was trying for about five minutes to guess a resident gate code so it wouldn't be on the record that he used the emergency code for no emergency), and threatened to beat the crap out of me, I better let him in because I should show him some respect.
After this incident, I am afraid to speak to police because, in their line of work my friend told me, they are suspicious of everyone for their own safety. That's fine, and I think wise, but there is a serious difference between being overly cautious and suspicious and beind downright disrespectful, threatening, and harassing young people and minorities because we all "look suspicious". Perhaps I should spray paint my hair grey so I don't "look suspicious" anymore.
I know my experiences with police have been extremely mild in comparison with other people's experiences, fortunately for me, I never was up to no good when encountering police. Well, this is certainly an off-topic rant, but it goes to show how enthusiastic I am to be visually followed around a city, marked as "suspicious" because I'm young, then pinpointed for harrassment by the police.
Surely there are more respectful ways to treat americans!
Very true, but I think in reality AOL will simply drop Netscape. There is just no resurrecting it, no matter how hard they (AOL) try. Mozilla will live on, of course, but after signing a seven year deal for IE in AOL, AOL all but signed Netscape's death warrant. They're probably currently deciding how much of it to use as a tax write off.
On the other hand, perhaps AOL is waiting for Firebird before deciding whether to completely do away with Netscape... They could give Firebird some fancy Netscape branding and call the whole affair Netscape 8 for its last shot, but really, the fact that they won't even bundle it with AOL should be telling of just how high they rate its chances of survival.
I think Firebird will probably emerge as the best contender. Packaging it with Netscape branding will at least take advantage of a familiar brand name for people! That might be its best hope. Of course, the one small problem still remains... though the author of the article squarely calls IE 6 Dead, it is still (and you better believe will continue to be until a court order pries it out of MS's hand) the default, pre-installed web browser on Windows.
Any browser that comes out without that kind of pull will, no matter how much better than IE 6, be just a contender (unless the courts allow competition...).
Very true :) I was just poking fun at the fact that IBM is now the sole producer of Apple's Power PCs... it seems like a long time for moto (but they brought it on themselves with their stagnation). Besides, the whole Apple vs. IBM PC (of the mid-1980's) I was poking fun at seems so long ago now (gosh, I feel old)!
As for hating big corporations (ala IBM or Microsoft), I don't really like to harbor any hatred toward companies. Though they (and don't mistake, they ALL) make scummy business moves, I find hating one company instead of another rather fan-boyish behavior that seems rampant of late.
It seems that so many people I run into are fixated on hating a certain Washington state company, and that's fine and dandy, but don't forget that ALL publically traded companies are out to do the same thing MS has done... make a ridiculous amount of money for their shareholders and drive anyone else they can out of business. Otherwise, companies would be selling products at cost, which doesn't happen, in the U.S. at least.
I really don't believe that if any other company were in MS's position they would behave any more or less ethically. That much money is an ultimate corrupter, especially when you have a greedy board of directors crying for MORE, MORE.
Time for sleep!!!
I suppose one of the problems with benchmarking on Windows with GCC is that GCC does not run NATIVELY on Windows... you need to run it on top of Cygwin or MinGW.
That alone will make the performance hit that Wosniak was talking about. It's strange business benchmarking across two entirely different processors. I think they've done the best possible to balance the scales by using GCC on OSX and Linux (where it can run natively). Maybe they should have run the Dells on a similar to OSX's BSD build for x86 (maybe Darwin, though it's probably not optimized as much for x86) to get even closer to normalizing the benchmark (if it's really possible). Though, I think Linux on workstations is more realisting in the real world than BSD on x86 workstations so it's pretty fair.
In any case, if the 3Ghz G5 happens on the schedule stated by Steve Jobs, the Powermacs running dual 3Ghz G5's should be head and shoulders above the current Intel-based offerings. Of course, we'll have to wait and see what Intel and AMD have available by then.
You know, processor benchmarking is just a geek way of saying "mine is bigger than...". I think it's great that Apple's really back in the performance game, it can only help everyone by re-lighting a fire under Intel, IBM, and AMD to innovate in a contest for (temporary) bragging rights.
Ya know, it's a very strange day when the Apple faithful are getting a raging hard-on from a new IBM processor! I'm wearing my Apocalypse-proof suit until August, just in case.
I thought the G5 was soo the month after next month (August)!
You can only get a G4 shipped to you tomorrow, so G4 it still is.
Ever bought a gallon of gas where an Integer was the price per gallon?
For students and/or educators (personal purchases), the Powermac G5 line goes like so in prices:
1.6GHz - $1,899
1.8GHz - $2,299
Dual 2GHz - $2,849
The discounts are consistent with previous Apple academic discounts. These are the same configurations as the corresponding non-educational priced retail systems:
1.6GHz - $1,999
1.8GHz - $2,399
Dual 2GHz - $2,999