VMS is great, but you either have to run it on huge/old/slow equipment (Vax) or older somewhat slower (older alpha), or modern $$$ equipment. Itaniums aren't cheap (neither are more modern Alpah machines I've seen on ebay).
It's a great OS, but hard to run on equipment most of us have or can afford. If Itaniums were down around the cost of P4's, it would likely draw much more interest.
Sorry, Spotlight on Mac is not the same thing (I've got a Mac too). Although Apple hired Dominic Giampaolo (creator of the Be File System) and he made spotlight, spotlight is a hack onto the existimg Mac filesystem. It isn't built into it by design as he did with BeOS. Spotlight is somewhat similar, but not as good as BFS. Maybe by os 10.6 we'll have an equivalent of BFS, but it's not there yet. Sorry.
Be was almost completely POSIX complient. That's why 95% of the apps for it were just quick ports of POSIX programs that had been already written for *BSD/Linux.
Personally, I wish idiots like you would try learning something about an OS before bashing it. It's obvious you've never used it.
Well, I wouldn't pay $144. And I'm a huge old BeOS fan. I bought a dual CPU system with the exact specs that Be used for 3.0 and had the machine up and waiting for the release date to install it. Be themselves didn't charege that much. 4.0 was only $70 for a full version or $35 for an upgrade. That was including Gobe.
Now that it's not Be anymore, but a group just trying to update it, I'm just not willing to part with $100+ to see basically BeOS 5.x with some additional hardware support.
There's nothing I'd like more than to see BeOS make a big comeback, but from what I'm reading I just dont' see this as a big point-release upgrade from 5.0, and definitely not worth $100++.
My boss swears Tiger is slower than 10.3 on his 15" powerbook. I haven't noticed it on my 12" powerbook, but I alternate betwen that machine and two non apple machines often enough that I might miss the change.
I wasn't talking about one car hitting another either. As in the star systems colliding to form a 3 star system with a planet from one of the original stars in the parent posts. The three stars didn't literally smash into each other, but their systems 'collided' to form a new 3-star system. Same with galaxies.
They need to let folks they are knowing this. If I had just shown up there and they had asked for my fingerprints I would refuse. But I would have already blown money for hotels and airfare to get there. I had no idea they were requiring this of season ticket holders or anyone before.
I certainly won't be giving any of them my cash in the future.
I've known users who have installed winzip, un-password protected a zipped virus, and executed it. All on instructions that came with the virus in an email. The average user can do it with nicely written step by step instructions on how to hose their system. Running a destructive *nix script with instructions will be no harder.
The email came from someone they trusted. They'd *never* send them anything dangerous. ARRRGHHH!
Yep, it's already been gone over many times that Apple was only using 2-3% of the capacity of one of IBMs fabrication facilities to churn out chips. To think that was going to be a tremendous blow to IBM in any was is silly. Apple just isn't that important to them.
Ahh, that different configuration with the horizontal RAM probably makes a big difference. Those normally block access to a large chunk of the motherboards surface for a fan blowing right along the edge.
Yes, with the 3 120mm's up front I saw no need for the crossflow. My board and CPU run plenty cool. There is essentially a full wall of air moving through the case.
Hehe...some even say it's big enough to ride if you wanted.
Hey, I've got the same case and I don't think it's ugly! But big, yeah, it's whompin big.
Seriously, I've read some reviews and most think the crossflow fan doesn't really help cool that much in ATX configs, but does in BTX. In ATX it might just be adding noise. I didn't buy that option for mine, so I'd be interested to know if you shut off that fan, do your cpu/motherboard temps go up?
I did buy two more of the 4/3 blocks with the 120mm fans for up front. Three 120mm fans up front really move some air through that case.
I don't think there's a problem with bandwidth. What does your computer do all day with the bandwidth? Nothing. Most everyone has plenty of bandwidth to spare.
I think your ISP may disagree when half their customers start saturating their pipes 24 hours a day so that they can watch a new movie each night.
Imagine you're winding your way through a national forest near the mexican border, boggling at the sights, the smells, the sounds, all the rest of what goes along with being in paradise. Imagine that all of a sudden out of goddamned nowhere a black helicopter appears, hovering above you, spotlight on. What might be going through your mind?
Obviously not, or you wouldn't suggest they paid for studies of the migration patterns of Caribou.
The "Biology" dollars are spread across research and studies in the many different areas you indicated not just Cancer and HIV which is what the article addresses (which combined probably get 60% of the funds).
The pharm companies do research in many different areas, not just Cancer and HIV eithre. What's your point? No, the $28 billion from NIH isn't all spent on Cancer and Aids. Neither is the 7.7 billion spent by that nameless pharm company you mentioned in your other post.
The NIH pays for a lot of things, drug testing of Company X new drugs is not usually one of them.
The NIH doesn't pay for the clinical trials of Company X new drugs, but they very well may have paid for all the basic research determining what the biological basis for the disease was, what specific pathways were involved, what molecules were good targets to hit, found the correct drug that *IS* that new drug X, and done all the testing of that drug in tissue culture and as well as in an animal model system. At that point, yes, the drug companies spend the money to test the drug in actual people.
There is a lot of money spent understanding diseases, transmission mechamisms, and a lot of reporting on disease fatalites (and the crazy bogus AIDS data) comes out of the NIH budget.
How do you propose the drug companies magically make a new drug without understanding the basic disease and what pathways and molecules they should target. That *IS* the research that leads to the curing drugs.
Remember, the drug companies have many other expenses in R&D, such as how to reduce the cost of each pill they make. That's for profits for the company, not for curing the disease.
A large part of the R&D budgets for these companies (some analysts claim up to half, but I'm skeptical if it's that high) also go for "me-too" drugs. Slight modifications to the chemical structures of drugs other companies are making so that the new company can also have a drug to sell to treat the same problem. This isn't great new drug discovery.
Drug companies, Pfizer, Merck, Abbot, McKesson, Bristol-Meyers, Wyeth, Am. Pharm, J&J, Celgene, Lilly, Bayer, Aventis..the list goes on. What was that about there not being but a few. I can find 50 easy on Google.
I bow to your leet google skills.
Now, let's look at the numbers...
I'll copy your leet googling and try to find some R&D bugets for fairly recent years...
A quick google for R&D bugets from a fairly recent year:
Wyeth 2.4 billion
Pfizer 3 billion
Merck 3 billion
Abbot 1.7 billion
Bristol-Myers 2 billion
J&J 3 billion
Eli Lilly 2.1 billion
..
Bayer - A european based company
Aventis - A european based company
Hold it: If you are going to toss in European based pharm companies, you are going to have to include the European government sponsored research budget along with that of the NIH. Hint, it's not an insignificant amount of money.
McKesson - This company is a pharmaceuticals distributor. NOT A MANUFACTURER. THEY HAVE NO DRUG DISCOVERY R&D BUDGET!!!!
Your googling sucks.
The money they spend verus what the NIH spends make the NIH money look like peanuts.
Even the pharmaceutical lobby PhRMA (which includes the non-us based pharm companies) claims their total R&D budget is only about equal to that of the NIH. Now add in the goverment funded research for all those EU, etc, countries. The goverment funded research budget is larger than that of the pharm companies. It's not 'peanuts'.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that they didn't do any real research at all. I've been to some very good talks by researachers from pharm companies. The 'most' was supposed to qualify it that they do do some, but that's not where the largest chunk of their money is usually directed. Drug trials are the huge expense. Lots of money is involved there. They are a 'profit center' for the hospitals that do them.
Slashdot Mirror
It's a great OS, but hard to run on equipment most of us have or can afford. If Itaniums were down around the cost of P4's, it would likely draw much more interest.
But will they have the new fast, low-power chips that IBM recently announced?
This is one of the best writeups I've seen on him.
If that's the case, people should never call it 'Creative Comons: Public Domain' If you are putting those limitations on it, it is not public domain.
So do you really have that remarkably bad grasp of the BSD license, or are you just a pathetic troll?
Yes.
Sorry, Spotlight on Mac is not the same thing (I've got a Mac too). Although Apple hired Dominic Giampaolo (creator of the Be File System) and he made spotlight, spotlight is a hack onto the existimg Mac filesystem. It isn't built into it by design as he did with BeOS. Spotlight is somewhat similar, but not as good as BFS. Maybe by os 10.6 we'll have an equivalent of BFS, but it's not there yet. Sorry.
Be was almost completely POSIX complient. That's why 95% of the apps for it were just quick ports of POSIX programs that had been already written for *BSD/Linux.
Personally, I wish idiots like you would try learning something about an OS before bashing it. It's obvious you've never used it.
Oops, that was a typo. That was the price for 5.0 (not 4.0).
Now that it's not Be anymore, but a group just trying to update it, I'm just not willing to part with $100+ to see basically BeOS 5.x with some additional hardware support.
There's nothing I'd like more than to see BeOS make a big comeback, but from what I'm reading I just dont' see this as a big point-release upgrade from 5.0, and definitely not worth $100++.
I believe he has 768 MB in it. I dont think that's it, but I'll have him check the usage.
My boss swears Tiger is slower than 10.3 on his 15" powerbook. I haven't noticed it on my 12" powerbook, but I alternate betwen that machine and two non apple machines often enough that I might miss the change.
I wasn't talking about one car hitting another either. As in the star systems colliding to form a 3 star system with a planet from one of the original stars in the parent posts. The three stars didn't literally smash into each other, but their systems 'collided' to form a new 3-star system. Same with galaxies.
They need to let folks they are knowing this. If I had just shown up there and they had asked for my fingerprints I would refuse. But I would have already blown money for hotels and airfare to get there. I had no idea they were requiring this of season ticket holders or anyone before.
I certainly won't be giving any of them my cash in the future.
And who says that planet isn't being ejected from the other system? It may be doing so at a slow pace as you say Mercury is.
The email came from someone they trusted. They'd *never* send them anything dangerous. ARRRGHHH!
Yep, it's already been gone over many times that Apple was only using 2-3% of the capacity of one of IBMs fabrication facilities to churn out chips. To think that was going to be a tremendous blow to IBM in any was is silly. Apple just isn't that important to them.
Yes, with the 3 120mm's up front I saw no need for the crossflow. My board and CPU run plenty cool. There is essentially a full wall of air moving through the case.
Hehe...some even say it's big enough to ride if you wanted.
Did you put the wheels on yours? You can! ;)
Seriously, I've read some reviews and most think the crossflow fan doesn't really help cool that much in ATX configs, but does in BTX. In ATX it might just be adding noise. I didn't buy that option for mine, so I'd be interested to know if you shut off that fan, do your cpu/motherboard temps go up?
I did buy two more of the 4/3 blocks with the 120mm fans for up front. Three 120mm fans up front really move some air through that case.
This is a well cooled case.
I think your ISP may disagree when half their customers start saturating their pipes 24 hours a day so that they can watch a new movie each night.
That's weird.
Border patrol looking for illegal immigrants.
Obviously not, or you wouldn't suggest they paid for studies of the migration patterns of Caribou.
The "Biology" dollars are spread across research and studies in the many different areas you indicated not just Cancer and HIV which is what the article addresses (which combined probably get 60% of the funds).
The pharm companies do research in many different areas, not just Cancer and HIV eithre. What's your point? No, the $28 billion from NIH isn't all spent on Cancer and Aids. Neither is the 7.7 billion spent by that nameless pharm company you mentioned in your other post.
The NIH pays for a lot of things, drug testing of Company X new drugs is not usually one of them.
The NIH doesn't pay for the clinical trials of Company X new drugs, but they very well may have paid for all the basic research determining what the biological basis for the disease was, what specific pathways were involved, what molecules were good targets to hit, found the correct drug that *IS* that new drug X, and done all the testing of that drug in tissue culture and as well as in an animal model system. At that point, yes, the drug companies spend the money to test the drug in actual people.
There is a lot of money spent understanding diseases, transmission mechamisms, and a lot of reporting on disease fatalites (and the crazy bogus AIDS data) comes out of the NIH budget.
How do you propose the drug companies magically make a new drug without understanding the basic disease and what pathways and molecules they should target. That *IS* the research that leads to the curing drugs. Remember, the drug companies have many other expenses in R&D, such as how to reduce the cost of each pill they make. That's for profits for the company, not for curing the disease. A large part of the R&D budgets for these companies (some analysts claim up to half, but I'm skeptical if it's that high) also go for "me-too" drugs. Slight modifications to the chemical structures of drugs other companies are making so that the new company can also have a drug to sell to treat the same problem. This isn't great new drug discovery.
Drug companies, Pfizer, Merck, Abbot, McKesson, Bristol-Meyers, Wyeth, Am. Pharm, J&J, Celgene, Lilly, Bayer, Aventis..the list goes on. What was that about there not being but a few. I can find 50 easy on Google.
I bow to your leet google skills.
Now, let's look at the numbers... I'll copy your leet googling and try to find some R&D bugets for fairly recent years... A quick google for R&D bugets from a fairly recent year:
- Wyeth 2.4 billion
- Pfizer 3 billion
- Merck 3 billion
- Abbot 1.7 billion
- Bristol-Myers 2 billion
- J&J 3 billion
- Eli Lilly 2.1 billion
- ..
- Bayer - A european based company
- Aventis - A european based company
- McKesson - This company is a pharmaceuticals distributor. NOT A MANUFACTURER. THEY HAVE NO DRUG DISCOVERY R&D BUDGET!!!!
Your googling sucks.
The money they spend verus what the NIH spends make the NIH money look like peanuts.Hold it: If you are going to toss in European based pharm companies, you are going to have to include the European government sponsored research budget along with that of the NIH. Hint, it's not an insignificant amount of money.
Even the pharmaceutical lobby PhRMA (which includes the non-us based pharm companies) claims their total R&D budget is only about equal to that of the NIH. Now add in the goverment funded research for all those EU, etc, countries. The goverment funded research budget is larger than that of the pharm companies. It's not 'peanuts'.
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that they didn't do any real research at all. I've been to some very good talks by researachers from pharm companies. The 'most' was supposed to qualify it that they do do some, but that's not where the largest chunk of their money is usually directed. Drug trials are the huge expense. Lots of money is involved there. They are a 'profit center' for the hospitals that do them.