"rev meter" "revemeter" and "rev-meter" do not appear in the dictionary. "tachometer," however, does. Thus, tachometer meets my definition of acceptable, but revmeter, rev meter, and rev-meter do not. I won't personally attack you, but you are wrong to say that anything other than tachometer is perfectly acceptable without qualification. It is perfectly acceptable to *you*, but not universally so. I doubt you would consider a local colloquialism for thermometer, 'heat-stick,' to be perfectly acceptable in written communication. Even if you did, you'd be wrong. Also, after following your advice about googling for "rev meter," I found that all the (non-forum) links I clicked were not for tachometers. They were for devices that *included* tachometers and also measured speed and provided stopwatch functions. This is clearly *not* synonymous with tachometer.
Auto hide covers the taskbar, the quick launch bar, and the system tray. You can not hide one without hiding all of them. It would be nice if you could, but you can't. Let me explain the differences to you. The system tray is (by default) on the lower right portion of the screen. It contains icons of resident programs (usually system programs which are run at startup every time). The taskbar is directly to the left of the system tray (by default) and contains names of the applications you have started after your computer fully booted up. The quick launch bar is directly to the left of the taskbar and directly to the right of the start button (by default) and contains icons of programs you can launch by single-clicking. By default, these include a 'show the desktop' icon and an Internet Explorer icon, and many times an outlook express icon. However, although the quick launch bar, taskbar, and system tray are three seperate regions, with disparate purposes, they all auto-hide as one.
Games in which you can only follow the glorious patriotic line are just not complete. You've got to have the chance to be the bad guy once in a while.
That's why, imho, the GTA series does so well. It was the first game I ever played where you couldn't be a traditional 'good guy,' but you could choose to complete the missions without killing any cops or civilians if you wanted. Alternatively, you could simply go on a killing spree without trying to advance the storyline at all. Consequently, it feels much less constrained than typical games.
Your solution is unworkable. For it to work, you would have to answer the question "what is pornographic?" and that question hasn't been answered yet, despite countless attempts. If that question isn't definitively answered, you couldn't determine if a particular website should have a.xxx extension. What I want to know is why children are encouraged to visit museums (we went to one on a school trip, even) that show many 'artistic' nude paintings, when seeing a photo of the artist's model posed in the same way as she was in the painting would somehow be bad. It isn't logical. If seeing people naked is going to traumatize kids, why aren't we born with clothes on?
doubtless, your ex-friend is better off. Besides, was it an 'associate," as you say in your first sentence, or was it a "friend?" If you call him a "friend" then you obviously need a lesson in what that word means. If it was simply an associate, then he wasn't a friend in the first place, so how could he not be one anymore? I hope that everyone who would ditch an actual friend because they hold differing opinions about something as stupid as the fucking media biases in this country steps on a rusty landmine. Finally, I'd like to remove any misunderstandings about Fox NEWS channel. It clearly stands for the Fox North, East, West, South Channel, demonstrating their commitment to broadcasting commentary from every direction. Hope this clears up any confusion.
You make a terrific point that has only been made 76486677647675634534935894543597857863578623873847 times in this thread before you got here. Thanks. Let's give up on trying to get people to RTFA since it's obvious that's not going to happen...but maybe we can get people to RTFT instead.
Who thinks this is a problem? If you don't want to buy two of these cards, here's a novel idea: don't. Let those who want to burn their money buy two of these cards and get the nice placebo ego-boost and the rest of us will exist quite happily. Why bother criticizing these cards or the people who will buy them? If you aren't one, why do you care?
As an American, I wish I had a choice for an honest, pragmatic party which wasn't beholden to coporate interests, government buracracy, trial attorneys, entertainers, aristocrats, etc.
You do. It's called the Libertarian party. Unfortunately, a large number of its members vote fucking republicrat because they want to vote for someone who might win. If the dipshits would stop voting for non-libertarians...maybe some libertarians would win on more than a very small local level.
Nice troll. Would you cough up the cash if I pointed out to you an established Michael Moore on-film lie? Probably not. A little research would be sufficient for you to establish that whatever moore's intended ends, his means are not justified. http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/ Open your eyes.
So it's fascism for the OWNER of a theater to decide what movies to show in that theater, but it's freedom to TELL the theater owner what they HAVE to show? Welcome to the new America.
I'd be happy to have you buy my games. I work and go to school, and I don't have too much left over. Like I also said, which you conveniently forgot to quote, there are a number of games on the xbox I'd like to own but can't yet afford. That means I'm likely to end up with them at some point, but since it was the last console I got, I've put more money into ps2, gamecube, PC, and GBA games. Again, any donations to the cause will be applied solely to xbox games if that's what you want. Also, my PC's *purpose*, which is what I specifically built it for, is gaming. That it can do a *lot* more is an added bonus as far as I'm concerned. I said as much in my post, but I didn't spell it out quite as explicitly as I'm now doing. I purchased the components for my computer for exactly the same reason as I did my xbox, gamecube, and ps2 (well, that one was given to me but *someone* paid for it), which is to play games. If that's all it did, I'd be perfectly happy. It's just a bonus that it does more. I will agree to disagree on this one, though I still assert that console evangelist equates to fanboy. You're quite welcome to disagree.
alcohol, as it is basically the only mind-altering substance that is legal off the shelf and intended for that purpose. I've always thought it was strange to say 'sure it's perfectly okay to pickle your liver and ruin your stomach and your nerves because you want to get fucked up' and then say 'you can't do illegal drugs because they hurt you' even though many illegal drugs aren't as harmful as alcohol. the other argument is 'you can't do illegal drugs because it's bad to get fucked up' which doesn't hold water in a country with as much alcohol use as the us. My biased opinion boils down to this: most drugs are illegal because they don't have lucrative lobbyists making sure they're legal and a powerful group of people don't like the thought of other people doing something they themselves don't want to do and wouldn't do if it were legal anyhow (note to tin-hats: the 'powerful group of people' = the huge voter blocks who are anti-drug, not Majestic 2112 or whoever) and the giant government agencies who are involved in drug enforcement, as well as various other governmental departments...not some conspiracy, just the power of the electoral process and bureaucracy at work.
most especially, and importantly, the chair with hinged legs on the back so you don't fall over if you lean back in it. Fuck you, rest of the world, that one was OURS.
(If you're not a Simpsons fan, don't bother responding please, as you most likely did not get it.)
Sorry, you obviously aren't aware that most American's view of history is that everything significant must have been done by an American.
Most also think London and Russia are 2 countries in Europe.
I think you meant "...most Americans' view of..." also, you are correct, if you're speaking of the world post-1700. Even in things that we haven't invented, we excel. Take golf for example. The best golfers ever are American. Yet we didn't invent the game, we're just better golfers. You just can't handle the fact that America is now more important than all of Europe combined. Boo hoo. You shouldn't have sat on your laurels drinking earl grey while wearing mufti. Americans know it takes *hard work* to keep people subjugated. Lazy pansy yer-oh-pee-ans.
I've made no comparison of the Xbox to the PC. I'm talking consoles only. Your opinion that the EA service is better is decidedly in the minority, even at Slashdot.
I'm comparing it to the pc, since it's basically a barebones low-end pc with some media software running on it. They share ports of the same games, so they're comparable.
I suppose you can, but why would you want to? I can fry eggs on my BBQ grill too but I use the stove in the kitchen with a frying pan.
My pc is primarily a gaming machine, secondarily a tv/dvr and thirdly (or tertiarily I suppose) a web-browser. It can fill all three roles, why shouldn't I let it?
It seems your not familiar with Xbox Live. Play a late night game of MechAssault and you'll see for yourself.
The only xbox game I own is ninja gaiden. I have played a few xbox-live games of various genres at friends' houses, though, and mostly I have seen a mixed bag of idiots, noobs, halfway decent players, and droppers. That's anecdotal, but it convinces me since it's my experience:)
You would be correct, but I'm not asserting that "Xbox is the best console ever". Merely asserting that its the best of the three currently available. If Sony or Nintendo (or whomever) released a console superior to the Xbox than I would consider it. As it is, there is room for only 1 console in my home. Currently, the Xbox deserves that space.
If you tossed your xbox for a sony console and then went around talking about how it was the best console available, you'd be a sony fanboy. I don't grant your assertion that the xbox is the best console available. I have all three consoles and each one has pros and cons. I have been unhappy lately with the paucity of good games being released for the 'cube, and I have yet to purchase too many xbox games, though there are a few out I'd like to have. I do have a ton of ps2 games, however I'm not claiming ps2 is the best, it's just the one I got first (due to a friend giving away a paid-for preorder slip) and thus am most familiar with. I like some things about the gamecube better, like the size of it and the load times of the gmaes, not to mention the licenses they have, but I wouldn't say it's the best console. I like the graphics and sound on the xbox, but many times the online play is ps2 only. Again, every console has strong points that the others do not. That's why people who claim one or the other is better are fanboys.
Surely your not saying that its impossible to be objective about the capabilites of the gear. Is it fanboyish to state that the Xbox is the best of the bunch? I don't think so. It is. At one point the Atari 2600 was the best of the bunch (unless you asked Intelivision owners). At another point, it was the NES.
Surely you don't consider number of titles at all, do you? Or relative number of titles that are worth playing, or the ability to play mario and zelda games, or the ability to play ps1 games, or the ability to hook your gba up to your tv, or to the gamecube as a controller... these are all things the xbox is lacking. Do I think the xbox is 'worst?' Nope. I don't think there's any clear overall 'best' or 'worst' right now. It depends on what's important to you. And to a true gamer, having as many consoles as possible is important. Well, less precisely but more accurately, having more choices when it comes to gaming is important.
I'm wondering if your motivated by an anti-Microsoft bias.
Nope. I've bashed 'em when they needed bashing and stood up for 'em when they needed that. I have given them quite a bit of money, both directly and indirectly through various jobs. I've also steered people towards Linux or OS/2 (back in the day) when it was appropriate. I'm neither a Linux fanboy, a Microsoft fanboy, nor an IBM fanboy. Just like everything else, the tool that you use should be appropriate for the job you're trying to accomplish. For the true gamer, that's to play everything worth playing... which is one of those tasks that while never accomplished still rewards the attempt.
I suppose. I'm not qualified to answer that question in detail though since I don't own a PS2 or GC. If the Xbox never existed I suppose I would own a GC so I can play the high-quality Mario games. The deciding factor for me was Xbox Live. Live is excellent and it currently has no peers, so the choice was quite easy.
Not quite true. It isn't as good as the internet. It isn't as good (in my opinion) as ea's service, which until this year was available only for ps2.
I have told people about that Xbox Live is the greatest innovation in console gaming in a long time. I think any objective observer would agree. There is nothing like it. Playing against the best players in the world from my sofa is quite an experience.
Xbox live is expensive for what it does. It also doesn't qualify as innovation because it's just a way to charge for online play. (this is my opinion) Also, I can play against the 'best players' from my couch on my computer... although on the internet, just like on xbox live, you're usually *not* competing against the best players. Again, though, I could do this from my pc (wirelessly from my sofa, outputting the display to my tv) before I got an xbox.
We covered this ground already. I believe you conceded this point. It's quite possible to be a fan of gaming in general without obligating yourself to every piece of hardware available. Whats to stop the next person from asserting that owning two current consoles is not enough to qualify as a gamer; that you must have all three consoles!
No, I gave my definition of a 'gamer' while noticing that yours seemed to vary. I conceded that a person might spend a lot of time playing with only one game device, but that it was extremely unlikely. The interesting thing here is you're arguing that being a fan of gaming *in general* can mean not owning all the systems. I agree. I also think that a person who is a fan of gaming *in general* would not limit him/herself to one console. What is to stop it from becoming 3 systems to be a 'gamer'? The continuing presence of three major consoles. Surely if I can concede that one must not own *all* of the consoles extant in order to be a fanboy, you would concede that a serious gamer would own more than just one?
I love playing video games. I own a Xbox because it is the best video game console system available. I also play games on my PC. I also play Uno, Scrabble & chess. Am I a chess fanboy because I don't play checkers?
You are an Xbox fanboy. Were you to go around saying 'chess is the best game available' then yes, you would be a chess fanboy.
warning: incorrect assumptions, leading to spurious logic.
IF you double the number the transistors, then the transistors are also half size,
What if they are 1/4 size? or 3/4 size but the new base is bigger? what if they are on a slot processor instead of a socket one? What if they're exactly the same size, there's just twice as many of them?
which means that the electrons have half the distance to cover, so the speed can double as well.
Not too many, really. There's only been one that I am aware of that occurred in my hometown, Austin. I saw many, many protests, but the only one I ever saw that turned violent was, ironically, an anti-war protest. There was a peaceful counter-protest by pro-military people, and some of the 'anti-war' people started throwing rocks and punches. The cops broke it up and arrested some people, but they didn't do a damn thing until the violence started. Violent protests do NOT further causes and *should* be quelled. I'd prefer the methods used to be generally non-lethal, unlike in some other countries where they use tanks or VX gas.
Slashdot Mirror
"rev meter" "revemeter" and "rev-meter" do not appear in the dictionary. "tachometer," however, does. Thus, tachometer meets my definition of acceptable, but revmeter, rev meter, and rev-meter do not. I won't personally attack you, but you are wrong to say that anything other than tachometer is perfectly acceptable without qualification. It is perfectly acceptable to *you*, but not universally so. I doubt you would consider a local colloquialism for thermometer, 'heat-stick,' to be perfectly acceptable in written communication. Even if you did, you'd be wrong.
Also, after following your advice about googling for "rev meter," I found that all the (non-forum) links I clicked were not for tachometers. They were for devices that *included* tachometers and also measured speed and provided stopwatch functions. This is clearly *not* synonymous with tachometer.
Auto hide covers the taskbar, the quick launch bar, and the system tray. You can not hide one without hiding all of them. It would be nice if you could, but you can't. Let me explain the differences to you. The system tray is (by default) on the lower right portion of the screen. It contains icons of resident programs (usually system programs which are run at startup every time). The taskbar is directly to the left of the system tray (by default) and contains names of the applications you have started after your computer fully booted up. The quick launch bar is directly to the left of the taskbar and directly to the right of the start button (by default) and contains icons of programs you can launch by single-clicking. By default, these include a 'show the desktop' icon and an Internet Explorer icon, and many times an outlook express icon. However, although the quick launch bar, taskbar, and system tray are three seperate regions, with disparate purposes, they all auto-hide as one.
Who's more didactic now, biatch? Served.
Games in which you can only follow the glorious patriotic line are just not complete. You've got to have the chance to be the bad guy once in a while.
That's why, imho, the GTA series does so well. It was the first game I ever played where you couldn't be a traditional 'good guy,' but you could choose to complete the missions without killing any cops or civilians if you wanted. Alternatively, you could simply go on a killing spree without trying to advance the storyline at all. Consequently, it feels much less constrained than typical games.
Gore Vidal said "It is not enough to succeed. Others must fail." What a card, that guy.
Your solution is unworkable. For it to work, you would have to answer the question "what is pornographic?" and that question hasn't been answered yet, despite countless attempts. If that question isn't definitively answered, you couldn't determine if a particular website should have a .xxx extension.
What I want to know is why children are encouraged to visit museums (we went to one on a school trip, even) that show many 'artistic' nude paintings, when seeing a photo of the artist's model posed in the same way as she was in the painting would somehow be bad. It isn't logical. If seeing people naked is going to traumatize kids, why aren't we born with clothes on?
doubtless, your ex-friend is better off. Besides, was it an 'associate," as you say in your first sentence, or was it a "friend?" If you call him a "friend" then you obviously need a lesson in what that word means. If it was simply an associate, then he wasn't a friend in the first place, so how could he not be one anymore? I hope that everyone who would ditch an actual friend because they hold differing opinions about something as stupid as the fucking media biases in this country steps on a rusty landmine. Finally, I'd like to remove any misunderstandings about Fox NEWS channel. It clearly stands for the Fox North, East, West, South Channel, demonstrating their commitment to broadcasting commentary from every direction. Hope this clears up any confusion.
You make a terrific point that has only been made 76486677647675634534935894543597857863578623873847 times in this thread before you got here. Thanks. Let's give up on trying to get people to RTFA since it's obvious that's not going to happen...but maybe we can get people to RTFT instead.
Yes. However, I will not. I could, though.
Who thinks this is a problem? If you don't want to buy two of these cards, here's a novel idea: don't. Let those who want to burn their money buy two of these cards and get the nice placebo ego-boost and the rest of us will exist quite happily. Why bother criticizing these cards or the people who will buy them? If you aren't one, why do you care?
As an American, I wish I had a choice for an honest, pragmatic party which wasn't beholden to coporate interests, government buracracy, trial attorneys, entertainers, aristocrats, etc.
You do. It's called the Libertarian party. Unfortunately, a large number of its members vote fucking republicrat because they want to vote for someone who might win. If the dipshits would stop voting for non-libertarians...maybe some libertarians would win on more than a very small local level.
Don't support high school failures!
Right! I agree with you 100%! Let's reform the educational system so we stop having our high schools fail. (And our other schools, as well.)
Nice troll. Would you cough up the cash if I pointed out to you an established Michael Moore on-film lie?
Probably not.
A little research would be sufficient for you to establish that whatever moore's intended ends, his means are not justified.
http://www.bowlingfortruth.com/
Open your eyes.
So it's fascism for the OWNER of a theater to decide what movies to show in that theater, but it's freedom to TELL the theater owner what they HAVE to show?
Welcome to the new America.
I'd be happy to have you buy my games. I work and go to school, and I don't have too much left over. Like I also said, which you conveniently forgot to quote, there are a number of games on the xbox I'd like to own but can't yet afford. That means I'm likely to end up with them at some point, but since it was the last console I got, I've put more money into ps2, gamecube, PC, and GBA games. Again, any donations to the cause will be applied solely to xbox games if that's what you want.
Also, my PC's *purpose*, which is what I specifically built it for, is gaming. That it can do a *lot* more is an added bonus as far as I'm concerned. I said as much in my post, but I didn't spell it out quite as explicitly as I'm now doing. I purchased the components for my computer for exactly the same reason as I did my xbox, gamecube, and ps2 (well, that one was given to me but *someone* paid for it), which is to play games. If that's all it did, I'd be perfectly happy. It's just a bonus that it does more. I will agree to disagree on this one, though I still assert that console evangelist equates to fanboy. You're quite welcome to disagree.
alcohol, as it is basically the only mind-altering substance that is legal off the shelf and intended for that purpose. I've always thought it was strange to say 'sure it's perfectly okay to pickle your liver and ruin your stomach and your nerves because you want to get fucked up' and then say 'you can't do illegal drugs because they hurt you' even though many illegal drugs aren't as harmful as alcohol.
the other argument is 'you can't do illegal drugs because it's bad to get fucked up' which doesn't hold water in a country with as much alcohol use as the us. My biased opinion boils down to this: most drugs are illegal because they don't have lucrative lobbyists making sure they're legal and a powerful group of people don't like the thought of other people doing something they themselves don't want to do and wouldn't do if it were legal anyhow (note to tin-hats: the 'powerful group of people' = the huge voter blocks who are anti-drug, not Majestic 2112 or whoever) and the giant government agencies who are involved in drug enforcement, as well as various other governmental departments...not some conspiracy, just the power of the electoral process and bureaucracy at work.
most especially, and importantly, the chair with hinged legs on the back so you don't fall over if you lean back in it. Fuck you, rest of the world, that one was OURS.
(If you're not a Simpsons fan, don't bother responding please, as you most likely did not get it.)
Sorry, you obviously aren't aware that most American's view of history is that everything significant must have been done by an American.
Most also think London and Russia are 2 countries in Europe.
I think you meant "...most Americans' view of..."
also, you are correct, if you're speaking of the world post-1700. Even in things that we haven't invented, we excel. Take golf for example. The best golfers ever are American. Yet we didn't invent the game, we're just better golfers. You just can't handle the fact that America is now more important than all of Europe combined. Boo hoo. You shouldn't have sat on your laurels drinking earl grey while wearing mufti. Americans know it takes *hard work* to keep people subjugated. Lazy pansy yer-oh-pee-ans.
I've made no comparison of the Xbox to the PC. I'm talking consoles only. Your opinion that the EA service is better is decidedly in the minority, even at Slashdot.
:)
I'm comparing it to the pc, since it's basically a barebones low-end pc with some media software running on it. They share ports of the same games, so they're comparable.
I suppose you can, but why would you want to? I can fry eggs on my BBQ grill too but I use the stove in the kitchen with a frying pan.
My pc is primarily a gaming machine, secondarily a tv/dvr and thirdly (or tertiarily I suppose) a web-browser. It can fill all three roles, why shouldn't I let it?
It seems your not familiar with Xbox Live. Play a late night game of MechAssault and you'll see for yourself.
The only xbox game I own is ninja gaiden. I have played a few xbox-live games of various genres at friends' houses, though, and mostly I have seen a mixed bag of idiots, noobs, halfway decent players, and droppers. That's anecdotal, but it convinces me since it's my experience
You would be correct, but I'm not asserting that "Xbox is the best console ever". Merely asserting that its the best of the three currently available. If Sony or Nintendo (or whomever) released a console superior to the Xbox than I would consider it. As it is, there is room for only 1 console in my home. Currently, the Xbox deserves that space.
If you tossed your xbox for a sony console and then went around talking about how it was the best console available, you'd be a sony fanboy. I don't grant your assertion that the xbox is the best console available. I have all three consoles and each one has pros and cons. I have been unhappy lately with the paucity of good games being released for the 'cube, and I have yet to purchase too many xbox games, though there are a few out I'd like to have. I do have a ton of ps2 games, however I'm not claiming ps2 is the best, it's just the one I got first (due to a friend giving away a paid-for preorder slip) and thus am most familiar with. I like some things about the gamecube better, like the size of it and the load times of the gmaes, not to mention the licenses they have, but I wouldn't say it's the best console. I like the graphics and sound on the xbox, but many times the online play is ps2 only. Again, every console has strong points that the others do not. That's why people who claim one or the other is better are fanboys.
Surely your not saying that its impossible to be objective about the capabilites of the gear. Is it fanboyish to state that the Xbox is the best of the bunch? I don't think so. It is. At one point the Atari 2600 was the best of the bunch (unless you asked Intelivision owners). At another point, it was the NES.
Surely you don't consider number of titles at all, do you? Or relative number of titles that are worth playing, or the ability to play mario and zelda games, or the ability to play ps1 games, or the ability to hook your gba up to your tv, or to the gamecube as a controller...
these are all things the xbox is lacking. Do I think the xbox is 'worst?' Nope. I don't think there's any clear overall 'best' or 'worst' right now. It depends on what's important to you. And to a true gamer, having as many consoles as possible is important. Well, less precisely but more accurately, having more choices when it comes to gaming is important.
I'm wondering if your motivated by an anti-Microsoft bias.
Nope. I've bashed 'em when they needed bashing and stood up for 'em when they needed that. I have given them quite a bit of money, both directly and indirectly through various jobs. I've also steered people towards Linux or OS/2 (back in the day) when it was appropriate. I'm neither a Linux fanboy, a Microsoft fanboy, nor an IBM fanboy. Just like everything else, the tool that you use should be appropriate for the job you're trying to accomplish. For the true gamer, that's to play everything worth playing... which is one of those tasks that while never accomplished still rewards the attempt.
I suppose. I'm not qualified to answer that question in detail though since I don't own a PS2 or GC. If the Xbox never existed I suppose I would own a GC so I can play the high-quality Mario games. The deciding factor for me was Xbox Live. Live is excellent and it currently has no peers, so the choice was quite easy.
Not quite true. It isn't as good as the internet. It isn't as good (in my opinion) as ea's service, which until this year was available only for ps2.
I have told people about that Xbox Live is the greatest innovation in console gaming in a long time. I think any objective observer would agree. There is nothing like it. Playing against the best players in the world from my sofa is quite an experience.
Xbox live is expensive for what it does. It also doesn't qualify as innovation because it's just a way to charge for online play. (this is my opinion) Also, I can play against the 'best players' from my couch on my computer... although on the internet, just like on xbox live, you're usually *not* competing against the best players. Again, though, I could do this from my pc (wirelessly from my sofa, outputting the display to my tv) before I got an xbox.
We covered this ground already. I believe you conceded this point. It's quite possible to be a fan of gaming in general without obligating yourself to every piece of hardware available. Whats to stop the next person from asserting that owning two current consoles is not enough to qualify as a gamer; that you must have all three consoles!
No, I gave my definition of a 'gamer' while noticing that yours seemed to vary. I conceded that a person might spend a lot of time playing with only one game device, but that it was extremely unlikely. The interesting thing here is you're arguing that being a fan of gaming *in general* can mean not owning all the systems. I agree. I also think that a person who is a fan of gaming *in general* would not limit him/herself to one console. What is to stop it from becoming 3 systems to be a 'gamer'? The continuing presence of three major consoles. Surely if I can concede that one must not own *all* of the consoles extant in order to be a fanboy, you would concede that a serious gamer would own more than just one?
I love playing video games. I own a Xbox because it is the best video game console system available. I also play games on my PC. I also play Uno, Scrabble & chess. Am I a chess fanboy because I don't play checkers?
You are an Xbox fanboy. Were you to go around saying 'chess is the best game available' then yes, you would be a chess fanboy.
Any gmail user wishing to conduct an empirical test may send gmail invites to:
whorin4gmailinvites@hotmail.com
this is purely for research purposes.
(yes, this email address is real, and I will report successes to you if you should actually care to send an invite there.)
ever heard the saying 'too many cooks spoil the broth?'
it's been around a while.
They're not. If they were obvious, they wouldn't still happen.
Really? I guess that's why there aren't any train-auto accidents anymore. Perhaps your logic is flawed.
Optimize....Constrain....Accept
S COPE
COST
SCHEDULE
QUALITY
I knew a guy when I was contracting to the Air Force that used to put it like this:
Cheap, Fast, Good - pick 2.
I find this to be applicable almost anywhere.
warning: incorrect assumptions, leading to spurious logic.
IF you double the number the transistors, then the transistors are also half size,
What if they are 1/4 size? or 3/4 size but the new base is bigger? what if they are on a slot processor instead of a socket one? What if they're exactly the same size, there's just twice as many of them?
which means that the electrons have half the distance to cover, so the speed can double as well.
ehehehehe. you're funny.
Not too many, really. There's only been one that I am aware of that occurred in my hometown, Austin. I saw many, many protests, but the only one I ever saw that turned violent was, ironically, an anti-war protest. There was a peaceful counter-protest by pro-military people, and some of the 'anti-war' people started throwing rocks and punches. The cops broke it up and arrested some people, but they didn't do a damn thing until the violence started. Violent protests do NOT further causes and *should* be quelled. I'd prefer the methods used to be generally non-lethal, unlike in some other countries where they use tanks or VX gas.