Of course it adds up, but you still have to see it relative the normal cost, sure the processing power consumed would be massive for a single user but now since they have millions of them the extra cost for using HTTPS are probably not that big (not counting attachments that is..)
Yeah, because not using encryption the whole time in the first place made so much sense!
I can't understand how people argue. Same with people who say they don't "need" encryption, gpg or whatever. What's the benefit of not having it (except in gpgs case user convenience I guess)?
I've played some Quake last years, but I never got the deal with duke nuke'm. Probably because I didn't had a PC and we played Quake in school and multiplayer and the 3D of Quake was just better anyway.
So I may give it to little credits for what it was, but personally I have no need whatsoever to play it. In a day where ID1 let everyone play their "new Quake 3" I'd much rather spend my time with that.
And I guess most people would prefer to play Halo 2 or 3 or whatever is the latest compared to DN3D.
1) Wrong. I hate ads as much as anyone but saying that flash is mostly used for ads is ridiculous. It might have been true a few years back but not anymore.
I guess that depends on the webpages one visit, if you sites with simple games or other forms of "time waste" you may be correct. I don't play web based games and don't look at those collection pages of fun clips, videos, animations and such so all I see is lots of ads and video hosting.
2) I get what you are saying and I don't totally disagree with it but, again, you are basing your opinion on the last generation of flash websites. Take a look around at some of the newer/popular ones and you will see some really cool stuff along with navigation churned out by the sites around.
Thankfully not all kinds of webpages have gone with a flash based design, though I saw not that for instance our swedish obligatory government ran TV network SVT had created new flash only website about their reschedules (http://dittsvt.se), beyond that I notice it mostly on game websites.
Things like Blizzards websites, EAs about C&C 3 and so on. For instance I never figured out there actually was a scrollbar on the diablo 3 webpage, I tried to scroll down by clicking beneath the numbers or whatever but figured something ought to be wrong with some javascript or something, though I knew it was flash so not likely.. (or rather impossible.)
I have 100mbps download so actual "loading" isn't as much of my problem as having to look thru intros, panels to flip over and move around and lots of other animated bullcrap which they forces me to watch while waiting for the content and whatever I wanted. I don't want to show images in Windows which takes 4 seconds to bring forward with lots of animations and sounds.
I can't understand how anyone can design such un-user-friendly crap. It's just technique and design galore. Sweet for their designers and "programmers" to masturbate to but suck for everyone else. I don't need a cool website, I need a cool game;)
3) I have nothing for or against the flash videos but I like the option of pausing the video and coming back to it after it has finished loading the entire thing. If something else can provide the same with better quality then I am all for it.
Both WMP and Quicktime can buffer a streaming video, of course. But if you use say H.264 in Quicktime your users may have to download quicktime to see your content, and with WMV they need WMP and with DivX or similar they need to correct codecs. Some people probably find that annoying but nowadays almost everyone have flash so it's easy to have the video delivered in flash and not care about it. Flash is probably installed in way more machines than Quicktime, and WMV isn't ok if you want to support multiple platforms.
1. Applications (web-based and desktop): Flash + Flex 2. Games (web-based and desktop): Flash 3. Websites or parts of it : Flash + Flex 4. Banners/Ads/other crap : Flash 5. Videos : Flash
I don't think I've seen any flash applications, and I don't know why they would need flash. Regular webpage + code running on the server + javascript should solve most of it, right?
I know there are plenty of flash games, but I never play them so I wouldn't hesitate on removing flash for them. Isn't most of them very simple ones from people who have just learned a little flash to? Wrigley had some tower defence one which was decent, but single player suck anyway;)
Websites in flash suck, totally, imo that is, feel free to show me anything useful. (It has to be impossible to design without flash, be fast and not in my way anyhow, and not just a design showoff.)
True.
True, but it's simple to use videos without flash.
But Flash suck on OS X aswell, a couple of pages with flash ads can easily take all my processor power, no matter how much there is, which is just unacceptable.
What we need is to get rid of flash since it sucks balls, who needs it?
1) Flash are mostly used for ads, who wants ads? Especially if they move, makes sound, sits on top of other things, take lots of CPU power, memory and heats up your machine.
2) Flash are sometimes used to design complete webpages, which suck because they have to be navigated in a non-standard way, design goes over function, they take forever to load and I can't open lots of screenshots in multiple tabs...
3) Finally flash are used for videos, which I guess some people who don't have a clue like because that way they don't have to install any more codecs. But personally that's (youtube, gametrailers, and such) the only thing stopping me from removing flash completely, so I so much want this to change. Safari can handle video directly in the browser and I hope we see more of that, won't happen until the suckers with IE get the functionallity + couple of years extra I guess though:/ Even old embedded quicktime days was better.
Wtf are you talking about? All I say is that the distance between finland and the other countries have probably made it so that their genome haven't been that mixed with the other countries and that they therefor looks a little different.
But then again I don't get your point at all so.
Re:Establishing de facto (open source) standard ?
on
ECMAScript 4.0 Is Dead
·
· Score: 1
I don't see anything about multimedia? I don't know what needs he/she had but I guess animated SVG and video directly in the browser solves some issues.
Personally I hate flash and kind of all flash apps so.. As long as no one listen to Adobe I'm quite happy, very obvious that they want it as standard since I guess it's what flash uses, but then people would probably make more flash apps which require their plugin bullshit and well, no thanks.
Build on top of something open and make it work everywhere without being to heavy on the computer and I'll accept it.
Re:Establishing de facto (open source) standard ?
on
ECMAScript 4.0 Is Dead
·
· Score: 2, Informative
To me it's pretty obvious that they are outside because they don't border to any of the countries except a very small part against Sweden, most of their borders is against russia and the baltics (estonia) so they probably have more in common with those.
From the looks of that genome map the borders of the genomes are quite similar to the borders of the countries, and why would Finland be any different?
Though one would expect them to be a little similar to us (swedes), but I guess it's only that we are even more similar to the norwegians and danish people which makes finland look like an isolate island.
Everywhere or just in your country? Which in your case may be the same thing.
Lame, why shouldn't one be allowed to take a photograph of the plane one used / will use /.. I hope you are speaking about USA and that the bullshit haven't spread all over the planet.
But is it so hard to find pictures of an airport? Or just travel there and plan it in advance? Or get a general overview from airport maps / google earth / whatever?
Also the terrorist to tourist ratio are probably quite low..
As a Swede myself I have to say: Does not compute.
Anyway lame how people are so scared of everything and nothing. Someone I know was taking a picture at the airport wherever they was that time and someone removed the images for them.. I hope they atleast didn't removed all other images to.
Still suck, 10 years ago no one would care if you took a picture at an airport, and I don't really see how it matters, it's not like it's restricted area or top secret anyway.
Since I have this machine I'm not that much looking for other ones, but it's easy to find a machine with 2GB of ram and 256MB of vram for around 8000 sek at least. It will probably be fatter and maybe use say a 2GHz CPU or so, what do I know, and I don't care either. Probably have a bigger HDD than the cheapest mbp.
The later one probably have 1280x800 then I guess, so lower res, but twice as much ram, twice as big hdd, twice as much graphics ram, twice as many usb ports, card reader and e-sata and cost half as much as a MBP.
And this is from a general electronics chain in Sweden, from the real online computer stores you can probably get better deals.
I don't give a shit if they would "sell for loss", or more correctly not sell for a huge profit, that's not my problem, if I get a better machine for less that's all I care about.
Though most people would probably accept belt and maybe knee wraps as reasonable injury precautions. But you've have a hard time reasoning that way for a bench press shirt of deadlift suit.
And personally I'd see if like if you can't lift the weight in say a deadlift without the belt and not do it in a bad way then you actually CAN'T lift the weight. If you can do it with a belt doesn't matter. But I'd guess we would have seen more ugly and injury inducing lifts in competitions if belts wasn't allowed just because people wanted to win and would risk their back for a couple of extra KGs. Most people are intelligent enough to not do those kind of lifts on training though.
I've never heard of a risk of getting hernia from lifting without belt, bu maybe that's true to. Though I'd guess that if you increase your weights the whole time and never uses a belt your body will get used to and be able to handle it even when the weights have gotten bigger.
No way, I'm well aware that Apple computer should only be bought just after release because they carry the best price to performance value then but even then you need something like those 20% of from ADC membership to get them competitive priced.
I think the lowest end macbook pro cost something like 18.000 or 17.000 sek here now and you would probably get a HP with similar specs for 8-9.000 sek. Sure the HP will be fatter and carry more plastic but similar hardware spec and the extra bulk may even make it run cooler.
But when the next version of the macbook pro get released if you could get it for something like 13.000 sek then yes, it will be reasonable priced to similar products on the market, though most people pay much more.
And of course since Apple is in the monopolitic position they are in when it comes to selling macs you can only buy from them and therefor they always cripple the low end version of each and every product forcing you to pay for a mid or high end version to get a decent speced / uncrippled machine. And as all computer companies they take their chances to earn even more on the options because most often computers are compared at their base specs anyway. So for instance if I had wanted 256MB vram I would also have had to buy 1/11:th faster CPU which I didn't cared for and 40GB more HDD, all for just 5.000 sek more.... There the 256MB vram probably had something like a 300 sek value.
Similarly the 17" iMac had a TN-panel which therefor suck, I think the cheapest 20" iMacs still have 128MB vram, Macbooks use to (I don't know how it's now) not have a burner in the cheapest model, and so on. Even the cheapest Mac Pro have a very shitty graphics card, and since it's a mac you have to buy a special mac graphics card, there you could get any card if it would had been a hack.
Macbook Pro isn't a "really high end notebook", it's a "latest CPU notebook with lots of small but nice extra features otherwise weirdly speced and at an insane markup."
I don't care for CPU, I'd much rather have VRAM over CPU speed. Same for regular ram or 7200 rpm drive. Those extra features are things like, uhm, on the new one multitouch pad and the magnetic power cable I guess, not much more than that. Webcam and aluminium frame, keyboard back lightning, firewire and wlan may have been older then seen as cool features.
(I don't need to post as anonymous coward, *care* about how mac fanboys moderate me.)
I own a macbook pro but I'm not happy with the purchase and was more or less forced to buy it since I had paid for the ADC student membership to get it cheaper anyway. But then this edition had the same retarded 128MB of VRAM and they still have shitty screens, not to mention ridiculously overpriced and ran hot as hell.
I don't think it's right to say buy an HP and install OS X on it but you sure as hell get a much better product for your money.
Personally I wouldn't rate them above Intel in "future profit expectations" or whatever to call them. I see Intels product as something harder to copy / worth more.
It's harder to compare with Google since I don't really see Googles product, yeah I know, ads, but well.. It's not something real =P
Vs Dell it's more understandable, Dell doesn't offer any unique, they don't have their own product so to speak, if Dell died someone else would make similar PCs with similar software and no-one would care.
But then I rate the products of each company on their own merit and not the chances to earn money on them on the market.
Burgers with fries = ok. Protein isolate = not ok.
Not that I know what "artificial protein powders" covers, there is nothing artificial with whey, caseine, egg, soy, pea, rice or hemp protein I guess (not much more than any other food atleast) but the 30% energy percent would cover it anyway. I don't see why it matters if it's synthetically created amino acids or not either.
I can see how they may want to limit competitions and kids asking their parents for lots of supplement and such though. But uhm, care, like everyone have equal opportunities anyway.
Over here in Sweden AAS is what's (non-authorized) illegal to use for each and everyone, but if you compete in a sport under WADAs control there is a lot of other substances which are banned within that sport and competitions, even though normal non-competing people are free to use them.
And most performance enhancing drugs are probably used by normal people looking for a short cut to better physique / improvements / results /.. and not by the professionals (though in some sports such as cycling there may be a case that many people do use them, but still compared to all the drugs sold those people are few.)
Slashdot Mirror
You leave the nagging one to have sex with the other one?
Of course it adds up, but you still have to see it relative the normal cost, sure the processing power consumed would be massive for a single user but now since they have millions of them the extra cost for using HTTPS are probably not that big (not counting attachments that is ..)
Yeah, because not using encryption the whole time in the first place made so much sense!
I can't understand how people argue. Same with people who say they don't "need" encryption, gpg or whatever. What's the benefit of not having it (except in gpgs case user convenience I guess)?
I've played some Quake last years, but I never got the deal with duke nuke'm. Probably because I didn't had a PC and we played Quake in school and multiplayer and the 3D of Quake was just better anyway.
So I may give it to little credits for what it was, but personally I have no need whatsoever to play it. In a day where ID1 let everyone play their "new Quake 3" I'd much rather spend my time with that.
And I guess most people would prefer to play Halo 2 or 3 or whatever is the latest compared to DN3D.
Will look into it later, looks cool, thanks.
Not that I want a web OS though, so still just programmer masturbation ;), but still as a proof of possibilites it may be nice.
I can't even understand why someone would want to play it at this date.
Similar as I feel with most emulators, they look cool, I belive I want to play the games, but I never actually do.
Some things was best in their time.
1) Wrong. I hate ads as much as anyone but saying that flash is mostly used for ads is ridiculous. It might have been true a few years back but not anymore.
I guess that depends on the webpages one visit, if you sites with simple games or other forms of "time waste" you may be correct. I don't play web based games and don't look at those collection pages of fun clips, videos, animations and such so all I see is lots of ads and video hosting.
2) I get what you are saying and I don't totally disagree with it but, again, you are basing your opinion on the last generation of flash websites. Take a look around at some of the newer/popular ones and you will see some really cool stuff along with navigation churned out by the sites around.
Thankfully not all kinds of webpages have gone with a flash based design, though I saw not that for instance our swedish obligatory government ran TV network SVT had created new flash only website about their reschedules (http://dittsvt.se), beyond that I notice it mostly on game websites.
Things like Blizzards websites, EAs about C&C 3 and so on. For instance I never figured out there actually was a scrollbar on the diablo 3 webpage, I tried to scroll down by clicking beneath the numbers or whatever but figured something ought to be wrong with some javascript or something, though I knew it was flash so not likely .. (or rather impossible.)
I have 100mbps download so actual "loading" isn't as much of my problem as having to look thru intros, panels to flip over and move around and lots of other animated bullcrap which they forces me to watch while waiting for the content and whatever I wanted. I don't want to show images in Windows which takes 4 seconds to bring forward with lots of animations and sounds.
I can't understand how anyone can design such un-user-friendly crap. It's just technique and design galore. Sweet for their designers and "programmers" to masturbate to but suck for everyone else. I don't need a cool website, I need a cool game ;)
3) I have nothing for or against the flash videos but I like the option of pausing the video and coming back to it after it has finished loading the entire thing. If something else can provide the same with better quality then I am all for it.
Both WMP and Quicktime can buffer a streaming video, of course.
But if you use say H.264 in Quicktime your users may have to download quicktime to see your content, and with WMV they need WMP and with DivX or similar they need to correct codecs. Some people probably find that annoying but nowadays almost everyone have flash so it's easy to have the video delivered in flash and not care about it. Flash is probably installed in way more machines than Quicktime, and WMV isn't ok if you want to support multiple platforms.
1. Applications (web-based and desktop): Flash + Flex
2. Games (web-based and desktop): Flash
3. Websites or parts of it : Flash + Flex
4. Banners/Ads/other crap : Flash
5. Videos : Flash
I don't think I've seen any flash applications, and I don't know why they would need flash. Regular webpage + code running on the server + javascript should solve most of it, right?
I know there are plenty of flash games, but I never play them so I wouldn't hesitate on removing flash for them. Isn't most of them very simple ones from people who have just learned a little flash to? Wrigley had some tower defence one which was decent, but single player suck anyway ;)
Websites in flash suck, totally, imo that is, feel free to show me anything useful. (It has to be impossible to design without flash, be fast and not in my way anyhow, and not just a design showoff.)
True.
True, but it's simple to use videos without flash.
But Flash suck on OS X aswell, a couple of pages with flash ads can easily take all my processor power, no matter how much there is, which is just unacceptable.
What we need is to get rid of flash since it sucks balls, who needs it?
1) Flash are mostly used for ads, who wants ads? Especially if they move, makes sound, sits on top of other things, take lots of CPU power, memory and heats up your machine.
2) Flash are sometimes used to design complete webpages, which suck because they have to be navigated in a non-standard way, design goes over function, they take forever to load and I can't open lots of screenshots in multiple tabs...
3) Finally flash are used for videos, which I guess some people who don't have a clue like because that way they don't have to install any more codecs. But personally that's (youtube, gametrailers, and such) the only thing stopping me from removing flash completely, so I so much want this to change. Safari can handle video directly in the browser and I hope we see more of that, won't happen until the suckers with IE get the functionallity + couple of years extra I guess though :/
Even old embedded quicktime days was better.
Wtf are you talking about? All I say is that the distance between finland and the other countries have probably made it so that their genome haven't been that mixed with the other countries and that they therefor looks a little different.
But then again I don't get your point at all so.
I don't see anything about multimedia? I don't know what needs he/she had but I guess animated SVG and video directly in the browser solves some issues.
Personally I hate flash and kind of all flash apps so..
As long as no one listen to Adobe I'm quite happy, very obvious that they want it as standard since I guess it's what flash uses, but then people would probably make more flash apps which require their plugin bullshit and well, no thanks.
Build on top of something open and make it work everywhere without being to heavy on the computer and I'll accept it.
http://www.sproutcore.com/
To me it's pretty obvious that they are outside because they don't border to any of the countries except a very small part against Sweden, most of their borders is against russia and the baltics (estonia) so they probably have more in common with those.
From the looks of that genome map the borders of the genomes are quite similar to the borders of the countries, and why would Finland be any different?
Though one would expect them to be a little similar to us (swedes), but I guess it's only that we are even more similar to the norwegians and danish people which makes finland look like an isolate island.
Everywhere or just in your country? Which in your case may be the same thing.
Lame, why shouldn't one be allowed to take a photograph of the plane one used / will use / .. I hope you are speaking about USA and that the bullshit haven't spread all over the planet.
There is no terrorists in Kabul?
I meant places where people actually go.
But is it so hard to find pictures of an airport? Or just travel there and plan it in advance? Or get a general overview from airport maps / google earth / whatever?
Also the terrorist to tourist ratio are probably quite low ..
As a Swede myself I have to say: Does not compute.
Anyway lame how people are so scared of everything and nothing. Someone I know was taking a picture at the airport wherever they was that time and someone removed the images for them .. I hope they atleast didn't removed all other images to.
Still suck, 10 years ago no one would care if you took a picture at an airport, and I don't really see how it matters, it's not like it's restricted area or top secret anyway.
Camera + speakerbag with DJ Vadim - The terrorist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OD2gAjFtZ1A
Since I have this machine I'm not that much looking for other ones, but it's easy to find a machine with 2GB of ram and 256MB of vram for around 8000 sek at least. It will probably be fatter and maybe use say a 2GHz CPU or so, what do I know, and I don't care either. Probably have a bigger HDD than the cheapest mbp.
Compaq CQ50-112EO
2 GHz AMD Turion x2 RM70
3GB DDR2
200GB 5400 rpm sata
DVD-DL
8200m (crap.)
15.4" 1280x800
2.93 kr
5990 sek.
HP DV7-1094
C2D P8400
3GB DDR2
320 GB 5400 rpm SATA
9600 GT 512 MB
17" 1440x900
Got HDMI, e-sata which the MBP don't have.
9900 sek.
Asus M51TA-AP004C
Turion ZM82
4 GB DDR2
320 GB HDD
DVD-DL
HD3650 512MB
15.4" WXGA
hdmi, e-sata, wlan-n, gbit lan, bluetooth, expresscard, webcam, 4 usb, 8-in-1 card reader, 2.95 kg.
8990 sek.
The later one probably have 1280x800 then I guess, so lower res, but twice as much ram, twice as big hdd, twice as much graphics ram, twice as many usb ports, card reader and e-sata and cost half as much as a MBP.
And this is from a general electronics chain in Sweden, from the real online computer stores you can probably get better deals.
I don't give a shit if they would "sell for loss", or more correctly not sell for a huge profit, that's not my problem, if I get a better machine for less that's all I care about.
Though most people would probably accept belt and maybe knee wraps as reasonable injury precautions. But you've have a hard time reasoning that way for a bench press shirt of deadlift suit.
And personally I'd see if like if you can't lift the weight in say a deadlift without the belt and not do it in a bad way then you actually CAN'T lift the weight. If you can do it with a belt doesn't matter. But I'd guess we would have seen more ugly and injury inducing lifts in competitions if belts wasn't allowed just because people wanted to win and would risk their back for a couple of extra KGs. Most people are intelligent enough to not do those kind of lifts on training though.
I've never heard of a risk of getting hernia from lifting without belt, bu maybe that's true to. Though I'd guess that if you increase your weights the whole time and never uses a belt your body will get used to and be able to handle it even when the weights have gotten bigger.
No way, I'm well aware that Apple computer should only be bought just after release because they carry the best price to performance value then but even then you need something like those 20% of from ADC membership to get them competitive priced.
I think the lowest end macbook pro cost something like 18.000 or 17.000 sek here now and you would probably get a HP with similar specs for 8-9.000 sek. Sure the HP will be fatter and carry more plastic but similar hardware spec and the extra bulk may even make it run cooler.
But when the next version of the macbook pro get released if you could get it for something like 13.000 sek then yes, it will be reasonable priced to similar products on the market, though most people pay much more.
And of course since Apple is in the monopolitic position they are in when it comes to selling macs you can only buy from them and therefor they always cripple the low end version of each and every product forcing you to pay for a mid or high end version to get a decent speced / uncrippled machine. And as all computer companies they take their chances to earn even more on the options because most often computers are compared at their base specs anyway. So for instance if I had wanted 256MB vram I would also have had to buy 1/11:th faster CPU which I didn't cared for and 40GB more HDD, all for just 5.000 sek more.... There the 256MB vram probably had something like a 300 sek value.
Similarly the 17" iMac had a TN-panel which therefor suck, I think the cheapest 20" iMacs still have 128MB vram, Macbooks use to (I don't know how it's now) not have a burner in the cheapest model, and so on. Even the cheapest Mac Pro have a very shitty graphics card, and since it's a mac you have to buy a special mac graphics card, there you could get any card if it would had been a hack.
Macbook Pro isn't a "really high end notebook", it's a "latest CPU notebook with lots of small but nice extra features otherwise weirdly speced and at an insane markup."
I don't care for CPU, I'd much rather have VRAM over CPU speed. Same for regular ram or 7200 rpm drive. Those extra features are things like, uhm, on the new one multitouch pad and the magnetic power cable I guess, not much more than that. Webcam and aluminium frame, keyboard back lightning, firewire and wlan may have been older then seen as cool features.
That's because they are retarded.
(I don't need to post as anonymous coward, *care* about how mac fanboys moderate me.)
I own a macbook pro but I'm not happy with the purchase and was more or less forced to buy it since I had paid for the ADC student membership to get it cheaper anyway. But then this edition had the same retarded 128MB of VRAM and they still have shitty screens, not to mention ridiculously overpriced and ran hot as hell.
I don't think it's right to say buy an HP and install OS X on it but you sure as hell get a much better product for your money.
Personally I wouldn't rate them above Intel in "future profit expectations" or whatever to call them. I see Intels product as something harder to copy / worth more.
It's harder to compare with Google since I don't really see Googles product, yeah I know, ads, but well.. It's not something real =P
Vs Dell it's more understandable, Dell doesn't offer any unique, they don't have their own product so to speak, if Dell died someone else would make similar PCs with similar software and no-one would care.
But then I rate the products of each company on their own merit and not the chances to earn money on them on the market.
lol, yeah because protein is scary!!
Burgers with fries = ok.
Protein isolate = not ok.
Not that I know what "artificial protein powders" covers, there is nothing artificial with whey, caseine, egg, soy, pea, rice or hemp protein I guess (not much more than any other food atleast) but the 30% energy percent would cover it anyway. I don't see why it matters if it's synthetically created amino acids or not either.
I can see how they may want to limit competitions and kids asking their parents for lots of supplement and such though. But uhm, care, like everyone have equal opportunities anyway.
WADA doping list covers lots of substances, anabolic steroids just being one group of them.
http://www.wada-ama.org/rtecontent/document/2008_List_En.pdf
Over here in Sweden AAS is what's (non-authorized) illegal to use for each and everyone, but if you compete in a sport under WADAs control there is a lot of other substances which are banned within that sport and competitions, even though normal non-competing people are free to use them.
Except drugs for medical reasons is allowed so that's a non-issue.
Of course he meant non-authorized drugs, or whatever to call them.
And most performance enhancing drugs are probably used by normal people looking for a short cut to better physique / improvements / results / .. and not by the professionals (though in some sports such as cycling there may be a case that many people do use them, but still compared to all the drugs sold those people are few.)