The issue was regarding the introduction of a new technology in order to coax consumers into a new upgrade cycle in what could certainly be considered a flagging PC market at the moment.
--*The* #1 reason why VESA died out, is because PCI was faster. Extrapolate.
Speed was not the primary reason. VESA was an ISA-based standard, and PCI is leaps and bounds ahead of ISA with regards to IRQ sharing, resource allotment, Plug-and-Play, etc. At the time, video cards were not 3D-accelerated (not as we know them today) and bandwidth was not a terrible issue on these cards. At the time of VESA, the purpose of a video card was to draw a picture on the screen. VESA provided some handy extensions to people who were willing to use them, but the fact that it just wasn't worth it and that PCI offered so many more benefits over ISA was the real reason to switch. ISA-pushers tried to keep up with some PnP extensions, but as computers started adding more and more peripherals it became apparent that there weren't enough IRQs to go around under ISA.
--Yes, "classic" PCI will probably still be around for years because of compatibility/warehouse stock issues, but look at the vast majority of new motherboards in the last few years - ISA has pretty much died.
Again, PCI Express is not leaps-and-bounds ahead of PCI like PCI was with ISA. It's faster, much faster, but aside from that, there are really few reasons to upgrade because most peripherals are really just not that bandwidth-hungry yet. Certain cards, such as SCSI controllers and display adapters, would certainly benefit, but I can't see it entering mainstream consumer use as quickly as it's hyped.
Umpires don't weld the same car door hinges in the same place 500 times a day.
Remember, machines are tools, and are not 100% replacements for humans in the jobs they assist in doing. Vending machines for candy bars and Pepsi eliminate the need for concession stands everywhere, sure. But anything that requires judgment, like umpiring (is that a word?) probably isn't going to replaced anytime soon.
Just a tool, nothing more. And I think the MLB realize that fully.
PCI's not going anywhere anytime soon. Hell, some manufacturers of FM tuners and other PC periphery are still producing ISA components.
And, of course, technically speaking, PCI Express is not leaps and bounds ahead of PCI to the same degree that PCI was with ISA. One of the big reasons for PCI adoption was the ability to share IRQs: No such reason to move towards entirely PCI Express interfaces, aside from the higher speeds.
Besides, do you really think a sound card or 10/100 network card is going to need that kind of bandwidth? Manufacturers aren't going to isolate a MAJOR portion of their computing base to bring a few people some peripherals that would work just fine on PCI. The real reason for PCI Express is higher-bandwidth applications for gigabit Ethernet, high-speed Serial SCSI interfaces, high-end graphics hardware, and things of that nature.
I haven't heard any news about this, and I have several gripes with this story:
First off, the article mentioned that USB1.1 had been changed to USB2, while leaving USB2 the same. Referencing the USB Implementers Forum website referenced by the article at http://www.usb.org, I couldn't find a single reference to USB 2.0. Seems USB 1.1 has been renamed "Original USB" where USB 2.0 is "Hi-Speed USB." (Check the FAQ under the question "How fast is USB?") This is an awfully big difference from what the article purports.
Secondly, I think most reputable manufacturers of hardware components to those who build their own PCs, such as motherboard chipsets, add-in USB2 (ha!) cards, etc. would maintain the older numbering scheme so as not to confuse their target market.
I think the source of this article's confusion comes from devices marked "Hi-Speed USB 2.0." Apparently this labeling scheme is supposed to combine the "USB 2.0" that older enthusiasts are familiar with, with the "Hi-Speed USB" that the USB Implementers Forum is pushing now.
Doing your own research is nicer than relying on a poorly-researched article.
It's a shame Microsoft employees aren't treated like employees. It's like every week now I hear a new story about some MS "permatemp" and their experiences.
Younger coders tend to be (erroneously) hired because many people think they're on top of the newest technologies. Here's a news flash: Newer technologies are only new for a short period of time.
This is why you see so many corporations, and smaller companies too, with interned developers, and why it's so common to hear, especially in the IT world, of rounds of layoffs followed by hiring fresh new faces from India or someplace.
The truth of the matter is that enthusiasm about programming, and computers in general, is what a lot of people should be looking for. It's very easy to keep on top of the newest technologies when doing so is a hobby rather than a once-a-week training seminar. One enthusiastic programmer can easily do more than an entire group of slack-jawed code monkeys with no real desire to do what they're doing.
Younger programmers might get hired more quickly, but they also run the risk of getting laid off pretty fast, too, if they pick the wrong place to get a job.
The software industry is by no means dead, it's just changing in ways most people either didn't expect or are uncomfortable with.
Let's face it, there is a finite limit to how much can and should really be done with word processors, calculators, and IDEs. There are really few relevant (and actually innovative) functions to be added to many of these types of programs, and many revisions just contain extra bloat. (Office XP, anyone?)
I've seen it said on this thread that much of this programming remains to be done for the embedded markets. Indeed, this is certainly the case. I think, however, many software development projects will become commodity projects, for internal use by a corporation, or development on a website, or something similar.
Comments and criticisms are most certainly welcome.
"Eye candy" is really not the best term to use here. The Plex theme looks awful, is unintuitive (did anyone else notice the taskbar buttons in the frickin' middle of the taskbar?) and the sidebar does nothing but make me click a few more times on a fresh Windows install to turn the damned thing off.
Anyone who has programmed on Windows knows that the MessageBox API function has flags for OK and Cancel buttons; go much beyond that, and you're writing custom dialogs. Microsoft is just too damn lazy to write custom dialogs for everything that ever has to pop up.
...that there are no drive letters in any of the Explorer screenshots? I'm wondering if this signals an eventual move away from drive letters towards UNC-style paths, or referring to volumes by their labels, in a fashion akin to Mac OS.
You think if were a parent I'd want my kids to not be looking at porn?
Please. For most neurotic, homophobic American parents these days are so caught up in proving to themselves that their aren't gay that they'd be proud to catch their kids looking at net porn.
With Opera, even if it does pop up, it's not going to take up the entire screen, because the windows that opens will be MDI'd.
It's a shame though, that a browser as good as Opera costs money to get rid of the ad in the corner (ironic, given the post topic). Not that I'd really mind paying it, though.
I use Opera anyway, with all my windows contained within one MDI container, so there's no way it could hope to take over my entire screen. Additionally, I have the browser set not to open pop-up windows I don't ask for explicitly by clicking on links.
I think this mostly just affects the poor schmucks still using Internet Explorer out there.;)
The change has angered some Monster users, who say the policy censors and discriminates against people including immigrants wotj ties to some of the countries in question or businesses seeking to recruit there.
It's good to see that even the Times can't run as much as a spell check anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
SUV drivers with American flags on the side.
Conservatives are such stereotypes.
The issue was regarding the introduction of a new technology in order to coax consumers into a new upgrade cycle in what could certainly be considered a flagging PC market at the moment.
--*The* #1 reason why VESA died out, is because PCI was faster. Extrapolate.
Speed was not the primary reason. VESA was an ISA-based standard, and PCI is leaps and bounds ahead of ISA with regards to IRQ sharing, resource allotment, Plug-and-Play, etc. At the time, video cards were not 3D-accelerated (not as we know them today) and bandwidth was not a terrible issue on these cards. At the time of VESA, the purpose of a video card was to draw a picture on the screen. VESA provided some handy extensions to people who were willing to use them, but the fact that it just wasn't worth it and that PCI offered so many more benefits over ISA was the real reason to switch. ISA-pushers tried to keep up with some PnP extensions, but as computers started adding more and more peripherals it became apparent that there weren't enough IRQs to go around under ISA.
--Yes, "classic" PCI will probably still be around for years because of compatibility/warehouse stock issues, but look at the vast majority of new motherboards in the last few years - ISA has pretty much died.
Again, PCI Express is not leaps-and-bounds ahead of PCI like PCI was with ISA. It's faster, much faster, but aside from that, there are really few reasons to upgrade because most peripherals are really just not that bandwidth-hungry yet. Certain cards, such as SCSI controllers and display adapters, would certainly benefit, but I can't see it entering mainstream consumer use as quickly as it's hyped.
Umpires don't weld the same car door hinges in the same place 500 times a day.
Remember, machines are tools, and are not 100% replacements for humans in the jobs they assist in doing. Vending machines for candy bars and Pepsi eliminate the need for concession stands everywhere, sure. But anything that requires judgment, like umpiring (is that a word?) probably isn't going to replaced anytime soon.
Just a tool, nothing more. And I think the MLB realize that fully.
(Go back to older African songs saying their women have bigger breasts/ass)
I wouldn't consider "Baby Got Back" an older African song.
USB1.1 wasn't actually renamed to USB2.0. That article was poorly researched, misleading, and in some instances just plain wrong.
Read my post on that, if you're confused.
PCI's not going anywhere anytime soon. Hell, some manufacturers of FM tuners and other PC periphery are still producing ISA components.
And, of course, technically speaking, PCI Express is not leaps and bounds ahead of PCI to the same degree that PCI was with ISA. One of the big reasons for PCI adoption was the ability to share IRQs: No such reason to move towards entirely PCI Express interfaces, aside from the higher speeds.
Besides, do you really think a sound card or 10/100 network card is going to need that kind of bandwidth? Manufacturers aren't going to isolate a MAJOR portion of their computing base to bring a few people some peripherals that would work just fine on PCI. The real reason for PCI Express is higher-bandwidth applications for gigabit Ethernet, high-speed Serial SCSI interfaces, high-end graphics hardware, and things of that nature.
I haven't heard any news about this, and I have several gripes with this story:
First off, the article mentioned that USB1.1 had been changed to USB2, while leaving USB2 the same. Referencing the USB Implementers Forum website referenced by the article at http://www.usb.org, I couldn't find a single reference to USB 2.0. Seems USB 1.1 has been renamed "Original USB" where USB 2.0 is "Hi-Speed USB." (Check the FAQ under the question "How fast is USB?") This is an awfully big difference from what the article purports.
Secondly, I think most reputable manufacturers of hardware components to those who build their own PCs, such as motherboard chipsets, add-in USB2 (ha!) cards, etc. would maintain the older numbering scheme so as not to confuse their target market.
I think the source of this article's confusion comes from devices marked "Hi-Speed USB 2.0." Apparently this labeling scheme is supposed to combine the "USB 2.0" that older enthusiasts are familiar with, with the "Hi-Speed USB" that the USB Implementers Forum is pushing now.
Doing your own research is nicer than relying on a poorly-researched article.
It's a shame Microsoft employees aren't treated like employees. It's like every week now I hear a new story about some MS "permatemp" and their experiences.
How exactly do you check the origin of proprietary code to begin with? Isn't that the point?
You're forgetting one minor detail:
GPL + open source.
How long do you really think it's going to take before someone makes it able to work anywhere?
It's a shame that cord just sticks out like that, it just makes the thing look ridiculous.
Now, if it were Bluetooth enabled for data transfer...
Be careful, or they might stick you with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act for that one.
Younger coders tend to be (erroneously) hired because many people think they're on top of the newest technologies. Here's a news flash: Newer technologies are only new for a short period of time.
This is why you see so many corporations, and smaller companies too, with interned developers, and why it's so common to hear, especially in the IT world, of rounds of layoffs followed by hiring fresh new faces from India or someplace.
The truth of the matter is that enthusiasm about programming, and computers in general, is what a lot of people should be looking for. It's very easy to keep on top of the newest technologies when doing so is a hobby rather than a once-a-week training seminar. One enthusiastic programmer can easily do more than an entire group of slack-jawed code monkeys with no real desire to do what they're doing.
Younger programmers might get hired more quickly, but they also run the risk of getting laid off pretty fast, too, if they pick the wrong place to get a job.
The software industry is by no means dead, it's just changing in ways most people either didn't expect or are uncomfortable with.
Let's face it, there is a finite limit to how much can and should really be done with word processors, calculators, and IDEs. There are really few relevant (and actually innovative) functions to be added to many of these types of programs, and many revisions just contain extra bloat. (Office XP, anyone?)
I've seen it said on this thread that much of this programming remains to be done for the embedded markets. Indeed, this is certainly the case. I think, however, many software development projects will become commodity projects, for internal use by a corporation, or development on a website, or something similar.
Comments and criticisms are most certainly welcome.
Haha, I didn't even notice that, sorry about the redundancy ;)
I just took a look at the screenshots and glanced over the article quickly.
"Eye candy" is really not the best term to use here. The Plex theme looks awful, is unintuitive (did anyone else notice the taskbar buttons in the frickin' middle of the taskbar?) and the sidebar does nothing but make me click a few more times on a fresh Windows install to turn the damned thing off.
Anyone who has programmed on Windows knows that the MessageBox API function has flags for OK and Cancel buttons; go much beyond that, and you're writing custom dialogs. Microsoft is just too damn lazy to write custom dialogs for everything that ever has to pop up.
...that there are no drive letters in any of the Explorer screenshots? I'm wondering if this signals an eventual move away from drive letters towards UNC-style paths, or referring to volumes by their labels, in a fashion akin to Mac OS.
This just proves that Linux has the DoS code from SCO's kernel.
You think if were a parent I'd want my kids to not be looking at porn?
Please. For most neurotic, homophobic American parents these days are so caught up in proving to themselves that their aren't gay that they'd be proud to catch their kids looking at net porn.
I'd be REALLY angry, frightened, cold, and shivering if someone drew up a hentai based on the Bill & Ted cartoon from 1991-92.
Hell, I don't think anyone even remembers that there WAS a Bill & Ted cartoon.
With Opera, even if it does pop up, it's not going to take up the entire screen, because the windows that opens will be MDI'd.
It's a shame though, that a browser as good as Opera costs money to get rid of the ad in the corner (ironic, given the post topic). Not that I'd really mind paying it, though.
I'd be more impressed that they somehow got the IR port on my computer to point directly at the remote receiver on my television.
I use Opera anyway, with all my windows contained within one MDI container, so there's no way it could hope to take over my entire screen. Additionally, I have the browser set not to open pop-up windows I don't ask for explicitly by clicking on links.
;)
I think this mostly just affects the poor schmucks still using Internet Explorer out there.
The change has angered some Monster users, who say the policy censors and discriminates against people including immigrants wotj ties to some of the countries in question or businesses seeking to recruit there.
It's good to see that even the Times can't run as much as a spell check anymore.