Anyone remember the good old days when people simply returned or sold the products they weren't satisfied with, so that they could get a new one? You know, instead of filing a fucking file class-action lawsuit.
I see, Linux's lack of success is due to vendor lock-in and monopoly abuse! Even though Linux is a totally free download and is for sale from Dell. Quite a bit younger than Windows? Linux began in the early 90s when Windows was only half a decade old.
Ah, the "free advertising" bullshit. Pirates use arguments like this to justify stealing EVERYBODY'S stuff, not just the ones who have turned a blind eye on purpose (essentially giving permission).
This is just another excuse people use to make sure someone doesn't get paid today by downloading their work. Along with scapegoating the RIAA and other tactics ("obsolete market," "cultural revolution," "other people will pay them by going to their concerts," etc.).
Considering Intel invented x86 decades ago and AMD just copied that, I'd consider them even. Intel unsuccessfully tried to move the world off of the ancient x86 instruction set, and lazy companies like Microsoft decided to put their weight behind the 64-bit x86 hack that AMD offered. Now we get to suffer another 20 years of working around x86.
starcraft was a revolution in itself. it was the FIRST game that had different races different from each other TOTALLY, while maintaining balance.
Even the original C&C1 had different units for each side--GDI was about powerful but slower technology while NOD was about stealthier, faster technology. Red Alert 1 separated the sides even further. I think StarCraft was the first RTS game I played that had three races, though.
all other games like age of empires and c&c had either different variants of all units for all races, or in the case of c&c, was a "build and send" game that didnt necessitate any tactics. in starcraft it was about wits, not who builds the most, fastest.
Oh, man, are we remembering the same game? Hello, Zerg/tank rush.
StarCraft was fun, but it seems the lack of a sequel for the last decade has made people romanticize the game as some unbeatable classic. It was a good game, but I eventually had my fill of it and moved on. The game is very repetitive.
Your feedback would be more effective by ignoring the articles you don't want to read. All you did for Slashdot was give them more page views and a higher comment count, proving the article was worth posting.
Why do people whine about stories they don't like IN THE COMMENTS FOR THAT VERY STORY? If you don't want to read something, fucking scroll past it on the front page!
Many people care about this because it's a sign of Microsoft's downward spiral and their inability to release worthy updates to their flagship products. We sat through five years of marketing promises, and now we're sitting through months of sales promises, all while this company is threatening us through non-specific patent claims. And you want to brush it under the rug?
I think I speak for the majority of Slashdot's readers, that we don't fucking care about Vista's sales that much. [...] So please stop wasting our time with this. We can live on without reading yet again about Vista's sales, in context, or out of it.
Then can I ask you something? Why did you click the Read More link on the front page, read the summary, click Reply, and type out an entire post if you don't fucking care? I have a much more effective solution to your problem--use the scrollbar on the right side of the window to move right past the article you don't like.
Hehe... any "I choose FOSS" thread inevitably includes someone touting the "best tool for the job" mantra. What I find amusing is the implication that FOSS doesn't apply to this concept.
There is no implication other than what he's saying directly, that he chooses his tools based on their effectiveness for his current problem, not whether it fits into some OSS philosophy. That may mean OSS software, or it may not.
A lot of people reminisce without thinking through the differences between then and now. A lot of us remember the days of 8MB, 16MB, and 64MB of RAM being enough for our needs, but don't take for granted the following:
1.) New rendering paradigms in the operating system that require more resources, like resolution independence, vector graphics, and hardware acceleration of window textures in Quartz and Avalon. 2.) In the same vein, screen resolutions and color depths have increased. 3.) Sound cards are operating at higher frequency and bit rates, and multiple speaker systems are not uncommon. 4.) Today's audio and video codecs are higher quality but more resource-intensive. 5.) Convenience services like metadata file indexing, spellchecking, garbage collection, automatic network configuration, automatically updating RSS feeds, background system snapshots (e.g., System Restore), automatic file defragmentation ala Mac OS X, and more. 6.) Today, I bet you commonly have 20 or 30 browser tabs open at times, maybe more. Five years ago, you might have had only five or ten open. Before that, you only browsed with one or two windows open at a time. And websites back then used lower quality JPEGs and GIFs, while today we have high-resolution, high-quality PNGs and JPEGs and high-quality video clips running through Flash and Quicktime.
We have a lot more things running at once that all add up, and to have all these things running smoothly enough for a responsive user interface, it takes a lot of resources allocating precious cycles at every opportunity. Your 48MB GameCube doesn't have to run a general purpose operating system, and its specs are set in stone so that developers can specifically optimize for it to extreme degrees that desktop applications relying on high-level APIs and cross-platform compatibility can't afford.
Many of those things should be provided by the operating system. For instance, Mac OS X provides spellchecking services automatically, and the private RSS framework currently in Tiger will be made publicly available in Leopard. Safari 3.0 will just link to what it needs. The issue here is that Firefox is cross-platform, so it needs those features built-in to take advantage of them universally on all installations.
However, some of the features such as popup blocking are features I do consider essential to a web browser. There's no bloat in stopping rogue JavaScript code.
What's odd is that Opera packs all that stuff in and more (even a BitTorrent client!), and it's faster and more lightweight in terms of resource requirements. Even the download size is amazingly small. What is it that makes Firefox worse in that regard? The XUL stuff? Convoluted codebase making improvement difficult?
I think I speak for everybody here when I say it is our hope that you "truthers" are quickly put on your meds so the rest of us don't have to sift through your bullshit. There's really nothing dumber than claiming Bush knew about 9/11, because then he would have stopped it to make himself look good rather than reading through a kid's book after the secret service agent told him to stay put, making him look stupid to ignorant viewers of hack-job Michael Moore conspiracy films. It doesn't matter how many engineers who actually built the fucking towers claim you're controlled demolition theories are wrong. You just want something to believe in that has no proof whatsoever so that it gives you something mysterious in your life. Fuck that.
Actually, OS X Leopard runs a 32-bit kernel with a 64-bit userspace. That's how it can get away with running 32-bit and 64-bit binaries and drivers natively.
As for this 64-bit push from Microsoft (assuming it ever comes true given their past promises regarding Vista features that were dropped), it's amusing how non-smoothly their 64-bit transition has gone. Nobody runs 64-bit Windows because barely anything works. Do they simply lack the engineering talent to be able to comfortably run 32-bit drivers or allow developers to ship fat binaries ala Mac OS X so that you're not having to deal with multiple executables? Ah, well, at least the next version of Windows may finally get away from the 25+ year old BIOS and support EFI. Maybe. When Microsoft gets around to it.
After the flop that is Vista, Microsoft has left a bitter taste in a lot of people's mouths. Not just you guys who always disliked them, but the tech press and even regular folks. I don't trust anything they say or do, especially any promises regarding the next version of Windows ("This time, we'll get it right!). Same old Win32, same old bullshit.
A lot of these "debunkings" aren't even that. For instance, the one trying to debunk the rising temperature of Mars just says the "evidence is sketchy." Well, yeah, the evidence for global warming here on Earth is sketchy too, which is why politicians use terms like "following the fingerprints" in describing the correlative, indirect conclusion that the rise of industry has risen the temperature. In fact, April's temperatures were cooler than average according to a report released today, and 2006 was the least active hurricane season in decades despite dire predictions to the contrary. Climate is unpredictable, folks. The rest of that particular debunking is just some sketchy explanations without any proof, like "it could be regional cooling."
Another one claiming to debunk that we predicted global cooling in the 1970s doesn't actually debunk it at all. In fact, it admits that many scientific papers indeed predicted it. Then it goes on to explain why they were wrong. How does that debunk it? If anything, it bolsters the argument ("If they were wrong then..."). The best part is the way it ends, by claiming THIS time they're right because TODAY's scientists say different. Why are they different from the scientists of the 1970s?
Look, whenever there's a claim of a consensus in science, run for the hills, because that is never true in science. There are plenty of top scientists who don't believe in the current Hysteria-O'-The-Year that's driving the current news cycle for ratings. When in doubt, follow the money, because there is money to be made in ineffective carbon credits, dangerous mercury light bulbs, and higher taxes. The current hysteria will be mocked in the same way "new Ice Age" fears of the 1970s are now mocked.
In 15 years, absolutely nothing will have happened, and we will be completely fine, and the media (which is a business) will have its journalists (employees) reporting on whatever news cycle is driving revenues that year. In 2007, global warming is driving revenues. When it stops driving revenues, it will disappear from the front pages.
I forgot to mention this. Microsoft refuses to give out the figures for Vista's WGA activation. That would give a good estimate of the actual number of users running Vista. I know Microsoft enthusiasts are absolutely desperate to spin any positive press for the Vista debacle, but it just doesn't fly with people anymore.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone remember the good old days when people simply returned or sold the products they weren't satisfied with, so that they could get a new one? You know, instead of filing a fucking file class-action lawsuit.
I see, Linux's lack of success is due to vendor lock-in and monopoly abuse! Even though Linux is a totally free download and is for sale from Dell. Quite a bit younger than Windows? Linux began in the early 90s when Windows was only half a decade old.
Nice try.
Huh? When I'm fully zoomed out in C&C3, I can't even make out the different kinds of units I have. You can see a lot of battleground.
Ah, the "free advertising" bullshit. Pirates use arguments like this to justify stealing EVERYBODY'S stuff, not just the ones who have turned a blind eye on purpose (essentially giving permission).
This is just another excuse people use to make sure someone doesn't get paid today by downloading their work. Along with scapegoating the RIAA and other tactics ("obsolete market," "cultural revolution," "other people will pay them by going to their concerts," etc.).
Considering Intel invented x86 decades ago and AMD just copied that, I'd consider them even. Intel unsuccessfully tried to move the world off of the ancient x86 instruction set, and lazy companies like Microsoft decided to put their weight behind the 64-bit x86 hack that AMD offered. Now we get to suffer another 20 years of working around x86.
This is Slashdot, where all companies are evil, and conspiracies rule the day. Oh, and AMD is always better for some reason.
You're seriously comparing the deep game of chess to the rushing goofiness of StarCraft?
Even the original C&C1 had different units for each side--GDI was about powerful but slower technology while NOD was about stealthier, faster technology. Red Alert 1 separated the sides even further. I think StarCraft was the first RTS game I played that had three races, though.
Oh, man, are we remembering the same game? Hello, Zerg/tank rush.
StarCraft was fun, but it seems the lack of a sequel for the last decade has made people romanticize the game as some unbeatable classic. It was a good game, but I eventually had my fill of it and moved on. The game is very repetitive.
What does Digg have to do with your repeated posting to a story you claim not to care about?
Your feedback would be more effective by ignoring the articles you don't want to read. All you did for Slashdot was give them more page views and a higher comment count, proving the article was worth posting.
Why do people whine about stories they don't like IN THE COMMENTS FOR THAT VERY STORY? If you don't want to read something, fucking scroll past it on the front page!
Many people care about this because it's a sign of Microsoft's downward spiral and their inability to release worthy updates to their flagship products. We sat through five years of marketing promises, and now we're sitting through months of sales promises, all while this company is threatening us through non-specific patent claims. And you want to brush it under the rug?
Then can I ask you something? Why did you click the Read More link on the front page, read the summary, click Reply, and type out an entire post if you don't fucking care? I have a much more effective solution to your problem--use the scrollbar on the right side of the window to move right past the article you don't like.
You're welcome!
There is no implication other than what he's saying directly, that he chooses his tools based on their effectiveness for his current problem, not whether it fits into some OSS philosophy. That may mean OSS software, or it may not.
A lot of people reminisce without thinking through the differences between then and now. A lot of us remember the days of 8MB, 16MB, and 64MB of RAM being enough for our needs, but don't take for granted the following:
1.) New rendering paradigms in the operating system that require more resources, like resolution independence, vector graphics, and hardware acceleration of window textures in Quartz and Avalon.
2.) In the same vein, screen resolutions and color depths have increased.
3.) Sound cards are operating at higher frequency and bit rates, and multiple speaker systems are not uncommon.
4.) Today's audio and video codecs are higher quality but more resource-intensive.
5.) Convenience services like metadata file indexing, spellchecking, garbage collection, automatic network configuration, automatically updating RSS feeds, background system snapshots (e.g., System Restore), automatic file defragmentation ala Mac OS X, and more.
6.) Today, I bet you commonly have 20 or 30 browser tabs open at times, maybe more. Five years ago, you might have had only five or ten open. Before that, you only browsed with one or two windows open at a time. And websites back then used lower quality JPEGs and GIFs, while today we have high-resolution, high-quality PNGs and JPEGs and high-quality video clips running through Flash and Quicktime.
We have a lot more things running at once that all add up, and to have all these things running smoothly enough for a responsive user interface, it takes a lot of resources allocating precious cycles at every opportunity. Your 48MB GameCube doesn't have to run a general purpose operating system, and its specs are set in stone so that developers can specifically optimize for it to extreme degrees that desktop applications relying on high-level APIs and cross-platform compatibility can't afford.
Many of those things should be provided by the operating system. For instance, Mac OS X provides spellchecking services automatically, and the private RSS framework currently in Tiger will be made publicly available in Leopard. Safari 3.0 will just link to what it needs. The issue here is that Firefox is cross-platform, so it needs those features built-in to take advantage of them universally on all installations.
However, some of the features such as popup blocking are features I do consider essential to a web browser. There's no bloat in stopping rogue JavaScript code.
Then what's the difference? Closed source software has "many eyes," too. They just happen to be paid by someone.
What you're saying is that we should disregard quality in favor of ideology. No offense, but fuck that.
What's odd is that Opera packs all that stuff in and more (even a BitTorrent client!), and it's faster and more lightweight in terms of resource requirements. Even the download size is amazingly small. What is it that makes Firefox worse in that regard? The XUL stuff? Convoluted codebase making improvement difficult?
I think I speak for everybody here when I say it is our hope that you "truthers" are quickly put on your meds so the rest of us don't have to sift through your bullshit. There's really nothing dumber than claiming Bush knew about 9/11, because then he would have stopped it to make himself look good rather than reading through a kid's book after the secret service agent told him to stay put, making him look stupid to ignorant viewers of hack-job Michael Moore conspiracy films. It doesn't matter how many engineers who actually built the fucking towers claim you're controlled demolition theories are wrong. You just want something to believe in that has no proof whatsoever so that it gives you something mysterious in your life. Fuck that.
Actually, OS X Leopard runs a 32-bit kernel with a 64-bit userspace. That's how it can get away with running 32-bit and 64-bit binaries and drivers natively.
As for this 64-bit push from Microsoft (assuming it ever comes true given their past promises regarding Vista features that were dropped), it's amusing how non-smoothly their 64-bit transition has gone. Nobody runs 64-bit Windows because barely anything works. Do they simply lack the engineering talent to be able to comfortably run 32-bit drivers or allow developers to ship fat binaries ala Mac OS X so that you're not having to deal with multiple executables? Ah, well, at least the next version of Windows may finally get away from the 25+ year old BIOS and support EFI. Maybe. When Microsoft gets around to it.
After the flop that is Vista, Microsoft has left a bitter taste in a lot of people's mouths. Not just you guys who always disliked them, but the tech press and even regular folks. I don't trust anything they say or do, especially any promises regarding the next version of Windows ("This time, we'll get it right!). Same old Win32, same old bullshit.
Uh, they gave a full demo of a real device.
What other phone has virtual touch technology, random access voicemail, a fully-featured web browser, and all the functionality of a video iPod, etc.?
My, the MS fanboys are out in full force after the patent announcement.
1.) Apple's Newton was first.
2.) The iPhone has a virtual keyboard.
3.) Apple is considering adding third-party support.
Just face facts here. Microsoft is waaay behind in 2007.
It's more likely that someone wanted to short the stock.
A lot of these "debunkings" aren't even that. For instance, the one trying to debunk the rising temperature of Mars just says the "evidence is sketchy." Well, yeah, the evidence for global warming here on Earth is sketchy too, which is why politicians use terms like "following the fingerprints" in describing the correlative, indirect conclusion that the rise of industry has risen the temperature. In fact, April's temperatures were cooler than average according to a report released today, and 2006 was the least active hurricane season in decades despite dire predictions to the contrary. Climate is unpredictable, folks. The rest of that particular debunking is just some sketchy explanations without any proof, like "it could be regional cooling."
Another one claiming to debunk that we predicted global cooling in the 1970s doesn't actually debunk it at all. In fact, it admits that many scientific papers indeed predicted it. Then it goes on to explain why they were wrong. How does that debunk it? If anything, it bolsters the argument ("If they were wrong then..."). The best part is the way it ends, by claiming THIS time they're right because TODAY's scientists say different. Why are they different from the scientists of the 1970s?
Look, whenever there's a claim of a consensus in science, run for the hills, because that is never true in science. There are plenty of top scientists who don't believe in the current Hysteria-O'-The-Year that's driving the current news cycle for ratings. When in doubt, follow the money, because there is money to be made in ineffective carbon credits, dangerous mercury light bulbs, and higher taxes. The current hysteria will be mocked in the same way "new Ice Age" fears of the 1970s are now mocked.
In 15 years, absolutely nothing will have happened, and we will be completely fine, and the media (which is a business) will have its journalists (employees) reporting on whatever news cycle is driving revenues that year. In 2007, global warming is driving revenues. When it stops driving revenues, it will disappear from the front pages.
I forgot to mention this. Microsoft refuses to give out the figures for Vista's WGA activation. That would give a good estimate of the actual number of users running Vista. I know Microsoft enthusiasts are absolutely desperate to spin any positive press for the Vista debacle, but it just doesn't fly with people anymore.