We're talking about linux desktops here, not servers. I have not as of yet had to manually edit anything on my 8.04 beta desktop install. I will admit that I have manually edited a few files in the past for things like running a python script once a day and adding mounting a NFS share on boot. But those aren't exactly things that your average user would ever be doing.
You sound miffed that you had to edit config files to get apache working correctly. THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD BE. I don't want a gui installed on my servers. I want to ssh in, make the changes and get out. I would prefer to edit config file manually on windows servers as well (and they have recently made this much more available in windows). Did you ever stop and think maybe you don't know enough to be running a server?
I'm pretty sure that there is a strong genetic component to it. It may be some sort of recessive trait that requires a trigger to turn on. We don't know yet, but I'd wager on genetics.
Perform well was relative. All of them perform well enough for most things. But you aren't going to play many 3d games on the eee. I'm not dissing it, in fact I'm going to buy one soon.
I'm not sure this is true anymore. I bought a 32" Olevia 720p LCD panel a little over a year ago for just under $500. Right now a 32" 720p Olevia at new egg is between $500-$600. I haven't seen much price drop in the smaller to mid-range sets in over a year. Where I have seen improvement is the 42"-50" sets. 1080p is becoming standard (I feel it's unneeded at 37" and smaller) and the price is coming down there.
You're wrong. A 2.0 movie will play on any correctly implemented 1.0 or 1.1 player. You just won't get all the features that the 2.0 movie has to offer, and realistically as those features are things like online games and content; 99% of people just won't care.
The thing to remember about laptops is that there are three things you can buy: performance, size, and price. You can only choose two of them at any one time. This computer and the Asus are small and cheap but do not perform well. You can have a cheap and fast laptop, but it will be big. You can have a small and fast laptop, but it will be expensive. When purchasing one, you have to decide what you want. For my case (already having at least four machines in the house) I don't need a laptop do be powerful. I want it to be small and portable. I'd like it to be cheap. This fits the bill.
Farm subsidies aren't necessarily a bad thing. The problem we have in the US is that we are subsidizing the wrong crops. If you are growing corn, wheat, and soy you get a fat check. Anything else, not so much. We'd be better off if we payed our farmers to grow a variety of crops so that everyone would have access to cheap local produce. Instead we subsidize corn, wheat, and soy and make processed foods cheaper than fruits and vegetables.
Does that mean I can have kids and you'll buy them? Seriously you may like kids but I can't stand them. I feel dirty every time that I think I was once one.
I would agree that the current system is neither fair nor simple. But you could easily make a fair and simple system. It would just never get done because it puts to many accountants out of business and there are no loopholes. Simply tax everyone at one rate. Exempt the first $X amount of dollars per person, 2 * $X for married couples and let them exempt some extra amount per child (up to a limit). Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are all included. There is no cap on the maximum amount of income that is taxed. And all income (including capital gains and the like) are taxed at the same rate.
It's simple and it's fair. No one can argue that it's not fair, because everyone is treated exactly the same. The difference is not everyone feels the effect the same. If the exemption for a family of 4 works out to $45,000 and they make $50,000 they get a bigger benefit than someone who takes home $10,000,000.
I think people can easily tell the difference between high quality video and low quality video but struggle to hear the difference between high and low quality audio.
If you had the same movie, one on a DVD with a decent up converter, and the other on blu-ray shown on the same TV with the same settings side by side, I guarantee most people would pick the blu-ray one as looking better.
The same test with audio just doesn't work. Most people can't tell the difference between MP3 and CD much less CD and SACD. About the only advantage SACD and DVD-A had are surround sound. The problem with that is that it requires decisions to be made when the music is recorded. Most bands just aren't going to up and start recording in surround sound. Plus you can't just easily convert old music into surround sound. Plus the majority of people listen to music in their cars or on headphones. Surround sound doesn't help much there.
Blu-Ray isn't going to be expensive much longer. I'm pretty sure it's price is dropping at least as fast as DVD did. Now that the format war is over, the cheap Chinese products will come out and push the cost even lower. You will probably see players in the $100-$150 range by Christmas. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if you find it very hard to buy a DVD player that does not also play blu-ray 2 years from now.
Please call me when Comcast gives me a fat enough pipe to watch 1080p movies. Comcast is already oversold on bandwith. Imagine what happens when people start trying to stream those huge movies. BluRay maybe the last physical format, but it's going to have a good run before it's replaced with downloading.
MiniDisc was actually fairly successful. It's competition was really DCC and DAT neither of which really ever got on with consumers at all. MiniDisc actually did quite well in it's niche.
Apparently you didn't buy DVD when it was new. I paid over $500 for my first DVD player, and I didn't even get a 1st gen player (more like 1.5 gen). And that was in 1997 dollars. If adjusted fro inflation, I would almost guarantee that Blu-Ray is following a similar path to DVD in price. DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap.
I'm not sure what I'm doing that is different. I download quite a few torrents. It's almost all British TV that hasn't aired here yet. My up/down ratio is over 1. Sure downloads go faster than uploads, but a lot of that is because there are more people seeding than downloading. My upload speed cap is also lower than my download speed cap due to comcast. I still can max out sending 50 KB/s though. But I have no problem keeping a good ratio. I start the torrent, it's downloaded in a less than an hour and then I've uploaded the whole thing by the time I wake up in the morning.
I'm using deluge, on ubuntu, with encryption turned on. Other than that I've done nothing.
Depends on which fathers you speak about. Jefferson most definitely was against religion. Thomas Pain and Ben Franklin were also, and Washington may have been to some extent. Some of the others not so much. Others, such as Patrick Henry, were definitely pro-religion. You can pick and choose quotes from any of them to try to prove either argument.
I completely agree. And I'm sick to death of the argument that since he's for the separation of church and state it doesn't matter. If you are dumb enough to doubt evolution, it can be shown that you are capable of being hoodwinked into believing stupid things. I don't want anyone in power who can be hoodwinked into something so stupid. It doesn't matter that he's not going to force his beliefs on me, he's just proven he's dumb. Do you want a dumbass running the country?
I feel sick to my stomach voting for any religious candidate, but I would never select anyone who ignores FACTS.
That was the dumbest link I've ever seen on slashdot. Sure they could fit the whole season of Heroes on one disc if they didn't want them to be in HD. What kind of moron wants a HD-DVD with standard def content?
In the past (when VHS first came out) a video tape was released and it was very expensive. So expensive that only video stores would purchase it. At a later date, a home version may have been released at a regular price. Of course, as the years went on more people wanted to buy tapes and the studios realized they could make more money by just releasing it to everyone. By the time DVD was out the two release dates was almost entirely phased out.
1) And Toshiba is different how? They both want to make as much money as possible.
2) Blu-Ray is harder to program for because it allows you to do more. In the short run this makes the special features lacking, but in the long run you have more power. Similar to the PS3 vs. XBox360.
3) None of these are open standards. Do you understand why Toshiba is giving away players? It's so that they could win the war and they would collect the royalties. The amount of royalties you have to pay to sell a disc is crazy. You either pay Toshiba or Sony for the rights to the format. You pay royalties on MPEG-4, MPEG-2, or WMV. You pay royalties to Dolby or DTS for audio. Who you pay royalties to makes absolutely no difference to disc makers. The only reason HD-DVD discs have a price advantage initially over Blu-Ray is because the same facilities that were used for DVD can be used. There is nothing inherent in the Blu-Ray format that makes it more expensive and after the initial setup the discs will be the same price. I remember paying $30+ for DVD discs in 1997, so a tooling up for a new format is always expensive.
4) The DRM on Blu-Ray is really no different that the DRM on HD-DVD. Blu-Ray might be slightly tougher to crack, but that's about it. HD-DVD does not have region coding, and Blu-Ray has it optional. But I don't see that as a big deal. I have a region hacked DVD Player, and many DVD's come region 0 anyway. I have no reason to believe it will be different with Blu-Ray.
All things being equal you could say that HD-DVD has a slight advantage (no region coding, and cheaper initial discs). However things aren't equal. Blu-Ray has a superior physical format, more hardware manufacturers lined up behind it and more studio support.
I miss the old food network with real chefs who could really cook. Now all we get are tours of pretzel factories, Rachel Ray's 100 shows, and Sandra Lee showing us how to make truffles out of store bought cake frosting. I've never been to culinary school, but I CRINGE when I see those people on TV and amazed they aren't cutting of fingers with their horrible knife skills.
I've been to Voodoo Doughnuts, and while the maple and bacon doughnut was good, they aren't as good Top Pot Doughnuts. And I'd say that Pike Place Market beats the Saturday Market, due in large part to the fact it's open every day. If Portland is going to brag, I'd say it should include Apizza Scholls and Pok Pok. We have some good pizza in Seattle, but Apizza Scholls may be the best in the world, and I don't say that lightly. And while we have pretty good Thai food here (I like Thai Tom), it's not close to the level that Pok Pok is at.
The funniest thing I've ever heard said about Portland is this (I believe it was Chuck Palahniuk, and I'm paraphrasing):
The West Coast tends to attract the weirdest members of the population, those that don't fit in any where else. Portland being the cheapest of the major cities on the west coast tends to get the weirdest ones who can't afford the other cities.
But they do affect how you live your life. Bird Flu, Super Staph infections, HIV, and other diseases our dependent on our knowledge of evolution for us to understand them. Gene Therapy and genetic engineering are as well. If you want work in these areas to continue, you better be on board with evolution.
Slashdot Mirror
We're talking about linux desktops here, not servers. I have not as of yet had to manually edit anything on my 8.04 beta desktop install. I will admit that I have manually edited a few files in the past for things like running a python script once a day and adding mounting a NFS share on boot. But those aren't exactly things that your average user would ever be doing.
You sound miffed that you had to edit config files to get apache working correctly. THIS IS HOW IT SHOULD BE. I don't want a gui installed on my servers. I want to ssh in, make the changes and get out. I would prefer to edit config file manually on windows servers as well (and they have recently made this much more available in windows). Did you ever stop and think maybe you don't know enough to be running a server?
I'm pretty sure that there is a strong genetic component to it. It may be some sort of recessive trait that requires a trigger to turn on. We don't know yet, but I'd wager on genetics.
It's probably genetic, and if so, you could make the case that it's the parent's fault. I wouldn't make that argument myself, but one could.
Perform well was relative. All of them perform well enough for most things. But you aren't going to play many 3d games on the eee. I'm not dissing it, in fact I'm going to buy one soon.
I'm not sure this is true anymore. I bought a 32" Olevia 720p LCD panel a little over a year ago for just under $500. Right now a 32" 720p Olevia at new egg is between $500-$600. I haven't seen much price drop in the smaller to mid-range sets in over a year. Where I have seen improvement is the 42"-50" sets. 1080p is becoming standard (I feel it's unneeded at 37" and smaller) and the price is coming down there.
You're wrong. A 2.0 movie will play on any correctly implemented 1.0 or 1.1 player. You just won't get all the features that the 2.0 movie has to offer, and realistically as those features are things like online games and content; 99% of people just won't care.
The thing to remember about laptops is that there are three things you can buy: performance, size, and price. You can only choose two of them at any one time. This computer and the Asus are small and cheap but do not perform well. You can have a cheap and fast laptop, but it will be big. You can have a small and fast laptop, but it will be expensive. When purchasing one, you have to decide what you want. For my case (already having at least four machines in the house) I don't need a laptop do be powerful. I want it to be small and portable. I'd like it to be cheap. This fits the bill.
Farm subsidies aren't necessarily a bad thing. The problem we have in the US is that we are subsidizing the wrong crops. If you are growing corn, wheat, and soy you get a fat check. Anything else, not so much. We'd be better off if we payed our farmers to grow a variety of crops so that everyone would have access to cheap local produce. Instead we subsidize corn, wheat, and soy and make processed foods cheaper than fruits and vegetables.
Does that mean I can have kids and you'll buy them? Seriously you may like kids but I can't stand them. I feel dirty every time that I think I was once one.
If the 80 core processor can run 10 virtual machines as fast as one machine on the 8 core processor, I would be interested.
I would agree that the current system is neither fair nor simple. But you could easily make a fair and simple system. It would just never get done because it puts to many accountants out of business and there are no loopholes. Simply tax everyone at one rate. Exempt the first $X amount of dollars per person, 2 * $X for married couples and let them exempt some extra amount per child (up to a limit). Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security are all included. There is no cap on the maximum amount of income that is taxed. And all income (including capital gains and the like) are taxed at the same rate.
It's simple and it's fair. No one can argue that it's not fair, because everyone is treated exactly the same. The difference is not everyone feels the effect the same. If the exemption for a family of 4 works out to $45,000 and they make $50,000 they get a bigger benefit than someone who takes home $10,000,000.
I think people can easily tell the difference between high quality video and low quality video but struggle to hear the difference between high and low quality audio.
If you had the same movie, one on a DVD with a decent up converter, and the other on blu-ray shown on the same TV with the same settings side by side, I guarantee most people would pick the blu-ray one as looking better.
The same test with audio just doesn't work. Most people can't tell the difference between MP3 and CD much less CD and SACD. About the only advantage SACD and DVD-A had are surround sound. The problem with that is that it requires decisions to be made when the music is recorded. Most bands just aren't going to up and start recording in surround sound. Plus you can't just easily convert old music into surround sound. Plus the majority of people listen to music in their cars or on headphones. Surround sound doesn't help much there.
Blu-Ray isn't going to be expensive much longer. I'm pretty sure it's price is dropping at least as fast as DVD did. Now that the format war is over, the cheap Chinese products will come out and push the cost even lower. You will probably see players in the $100-$150 range by Christmas. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if you find it very hard to buy a DVD player that does not also play blu-ray 2 years from now.
Please call me when Comcast gives me a fat enough pipe to watch 1080p movies. Comcast is already oversold on bandwith. Imagine what happens when people start trying to stream those huge movies. BluRay maybe the last physical format, but it's going to have a good run before it's replaced with downloading.
MiniDisc was actually fairly successful. It's competition was really DCC and DAT neither of which really ever got on with consumers at all. MiniDisc actually did quite well in it's niche.
Apparently you didn't buy DVD when it was new. I paid over $500 for my first DVD player, and I didn't even get a 1st gen player (more like 1.5 gen). And that was in 1997 dollars. If adjusted fro inflation, I would almost guarantee that Blu-Ray is following a similar path to DVD in price. DVD really didn't take off until 3-4 years after it came out, when the players got really cheap.
I'm not sure what I'm doing that is different. I download quite a few torrents. It's almost all British TV that hasn't aired here yet. My up/down ratio is over 1. Sure downloads go faster than uploads, but a lot of that is because there are more people seeding than downloading. My upload speed cap is also lower than my download speed cap due to comcast. I still can max out sending 50 KB/s though. But I have no problem keeping a good ratio. I start the torrent, it's downloaded in a less than an hour and then I've uploaded the whole thing by the time I wake up in the morning.
I'm using deluge, on ubuntu, with encryption turned on. Other than that I've done nothing.
Depends on which fathers you speak about. Jefferson most definitely was against religion. Thomas Pain and Ben Franklin were also, and Washington may have been to some extent. Some of the others not so much. Others, such as Patrick Henry, were definitely pro-religion. You can pick and choose quotes from any of them to try to prove either argument.
I completely agree. And I'm sick to death of the argument that since he's for the separation of church and state it doesn't matter. If you are dumb enough to doubt evolution, it can be shown that you are capable of being hoodwinked into believing stupid things. I don't want anyone in power who can be hoodwinked into something so stupid. It doesn't matter that he's not going to force his beliefs on me, he's just proven he's dumb. Do you want a dumbass running the country?
I feel sick to my stomach voting for any religious candidate, but I would never select anyone who ignores FACTS.
That was the dumbest link I've ever seen on slashdot. Sure they could fit the whole season of Heroes on one disc if they didn't want them to be in HD. What kind of moron wants a HD-DVD with standard def content?
In the past (when VHS first came out) a video tape was released and it was very expensive. So expensive that only video stores would purchase it. At a later date, a home version may have been released at a regular price. Of course, as the years went on more people wanted to buy tapes and the studios realized they could make more money by just releasing it to everyone. By the time DVD was out the two release dates was almost entirely phased out.
1) And Toshiba is different how? They both want to make as much money as possible.
2) Blu-Ray is harder to program for because it allows you to do more. In the short run this makes the special features lacking, but in the long run you have more power. Similar to the PS3 vs. XBox360.
3) None of these are open standards. Do you understand why Toshiba is giving away players? It's so that they could win the war and they would collect the royalties. The amount of royalties you have to pay to sell a disc is crazy. You either pay Toshiba or Sony for the rights to the format. You pay royalties on MPEG-4, MPEG-2, or WMV. You pay royalties to Dolby or DTS for audio. Who you pay royalties to makes absolutely no difference to disc makers. The only reason HD-DVD discs have a price advantage initially over Blu-Ray is because the same facilities that were used for DVD can be used. There is nothing inherent in the Blu-Ray format that makes it more expensive and after the initial setup the discs will be the same price. I remember paying $30+ for DVD discs in 1997, so a tooling up for a new format is always expensive.
4) The DRM on Blu-Ray is really no different that the DRM on HD-DVD. Blu-Ray might be slightly tougher to crack, but that's about it. HD-DVD does not have region coding, and Blu-Ray has it optional. But I don't see that as a big deal. I have a region hacked DVD Player, and many DVD's come region 0 anyway. I have no reason to believe it will be different with Blu-Ray.
All things being equal you could say that HD-DVD has a slight advantage (no region coding, and cheaper initial discs). However things aren't equal. Blu-Ray has a superior physical format, more hardware manufacturers lined up behind it and more studio support.
I miss the old food network with real chefs who could really cook. Now all we get are tours of pretzel factories, Rachel Ray's 100 shows, and Sandra Lee showing us how to make truffles out of store bought cake frosting. I've never been to culinary school, but I CRINGE when I see those people on TV and amazed they aren't cutting of fingers with their horrible knife skills.
I've been to Voodoo Doughnuts, and while the maple and bacon doughnut was good, they aren't as good Top Pot Doughnuts. And I'd say that Pike Place Market beats the Saturday Market, due in large part to the fact it's open every day. If Portland is going to brag, I'd say it should include Apizza Scholls and Pok Pok. We have some good pizza in Seattle, but Apizza Scholls may be the best in the world, and I don't say that lightly. And while we have pretty good Thai food here (I like Thai Tom), it's not close to the level that Pok Pok is at.
The funniest thing I've ever heard said about Portland is this (I believe it was Chuck Palahniuk, and I'm paraphrasing):
The West Coast tends to attract the weirdest members of the population, those that don't fit in any where else. Portland being the cheapest of the major cities on the west coast tends to get the weirdest ones who can't afford the other cities.
But they do affect how you live your life. Bird Flu, Super Staph infections, HIV, and other diseases our dependent on our knowledge of evolution for us to understand them. Gene Therapy and genetic engineering are as well. If you want work in these areas to continue, you better be on board with evolution.
How is a goose harder to fit in an oven? A goose is generally 10-13lbs. A turkey can easily top 20lbs.