Out of curiousity, what is it that you are doing via an SSH session to a Linux box and can be done on an OS X terminal but cannot be done with cygwin on Windows?
Actually, you would be surprised. I bought a gateway laptop with a 15.4 inch widescreen (native resolution: 1280x800) and Intel Extreme Graphics 2 integrated video adapter. Now, you would think that the video BIOS would advertise its 1280x800 resolution, but it does not, because that particular adapter isn't mean for that resolution. So I had to download a tool called 855resolution that lets you trick the video BIOS into advertising one of its existing modes as 1280x800 in order to get it to work with Xorg.
Why do you assume that Joe Schmoe won't be able to use a firewall just as he does now? For people at home, they could have a router connected to the WiMAX network, and then have their own 802.11b/g lan for their home behind a firewall on said router. Alternatively, there are always software firewalls, and I'm sure some clever wireless adapter manufacturers will soon also start building little hardware firewalls directly into the adapters themselves.
Actually, the Hitachi horror stories are pretty bad. I worked for a consulting firm that had me staffed at a very large chemical company that will remain un-named. Everyone in the company used IBM T40 laptops equiped with Hitachi drives. In the first year of the new workstation roll out, about 8% of the population (so roughly 4000) had dead hard drives. Yikes!
It sounds like you're not running X in the Dell's native resolution. If for some reason it just won't run in its native resolution, have you tried pressing fn+f7 or whatever it is to make the screen stretch? I'd check out your xorg.conf to make sure the resolution you're running in is the native resolution of the display first, though.
Stable if you have a 32-bit system, anyway. I tried using it as recently as a month ago on my Athlon 64, and during compilation I got all kinds of warnings about converting a pointer to integer of different size. Amazingly, it actually seemed to run, but the display was totally hosed, making it completely useless.
Well, to be fair to x86 (or specifically, x86-64), though, gcc pretty much sucks ass at floating point optimization. Try using PathScale's c++ compiler on an Opteron to compile nbench, run nbench, and then recompile it with gcc and run it again and look at the floating point index for both. You'll see what I mean... so its possible, and quite likely, that gcc is just better at floating point optimization on a G5.
This "benchmark" doesn't really tell us much about the actual performance of the hardware itself...
I think the other aspect is that, as a developer, you can develop console games that are gauranteed to look/function the same on every machine they are played on. This has to be enticing, atleast for serious gaming houses that produce a good number of titles. And, of course, as a user, you are gauranteed to get the same experience as everyone else. This is the primary reason I bought an Xbox. I want availability of good games, and I want to be assured they will just work, and I will enjoy them as much as anyone else.
I think also, the (somewhat) limited hardware of console systems (atleast compared to high-end, brand new PCs) forces developers to be more creative, and not just focus on something that looks incredible. Doom 3, for example, while it looks fantastic, isn't all that fun.
Since I'm sure you're still looking for responses to this, I ask: If my argument is so weak, why do you continue to respond? I'm especially amused that you went to all of that trouble to look for claims that Microsoft is a monopoly. Well, unfortunately, for you, it was a waste of time. I actually know economists, as well as lawyers (hmm, my girlfriend works for a law firm and her father is also a lawyer for a different firm) and have had this very conversation with them. I'm sure they are probably more qualified than a journalist who reports for the economist. Don't you know the media is owned by the corporations anyway?
I'll now take your approach to let you know that you are not any different than any other moron. You made some comment in your journal about your provocative posts. Please... you are uttering the same, mindless crap that 90% of the slashdot karma-whoring, MS-bashing public does. You're like the person who shops at Hot Topic because you think that makes you unique. Please, for everyone's sake, start thinking on your own, instead of regurgitating that which all of the other idiots on here repeat over and over again. "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake." Am I getting through to you at all here? What this forum needs is people who are capable of rational thought, rather than repeating the same worthless arguments over and over again, and then bashing people in their responses, just as I am doing right now, because it appears to be the only way to get through to your kind.
And in fact, my fellow engineers do not believe that Microsoft has a monopoly. If they did, we sure as shit wouldn't be working WITH MSFT on certain things. Come on, now... use your head. Why do you think MSFT has come to having "monopolistic power" anyway? Because they make products that are easy for people to use, and people then buy them. I sure hope you've never purchased any of their products (either directly or indirectly [such as by purchasing a new computer with Windows pre-installed), otherwise you're being awfully hypocritical.
Beyond that, you should consider taking an economics class, rather than trying to act like an expert on things just because you've read something on slashdot or looked something up on google. But then, I guess that wouldn't be the slashdot way.
Slashdot: FUD for psuedo-experts. Stuff that we like to repeat over and over to each other to make ourselves feel important.
Actually, my profession is quite relevant... I'm a software engineer working for a company that is not Microsoft. So, I guess its a pretty good thing for me that they aren't a monopoly, eh?
And I would like you to show me where they have been ruled a monopoly, rather than being ruled as having "monopolistic power". If you're not going to ask an economist (who would tell you that they are, in fact, NOT a monopoly), then you can just try this google search:
The whole point is, calling them a "monopoly" is where the FUD comes in, because it is tehcnically incorrect. Its similar to labeling people who support free software as communists.
And the fact that you've felt the need to personally attack me in every one of your responses doesn't do much to support your argument.
monopolistic power != monopoly. I am quite aware of the justice department rulings. If you don't believe my professional opinion, you should ask an economist if Microsoft is a monopoly.
monopoly
Audio pronunciation of "monopoly" ( P ) Pronunciation Key (m-np-l)
n. pl. monopolies
1. Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: "Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals" (Milton Friedman).
2. Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party.
3.
1. A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity.
2. A commodity or service so controlled.
4.
1. Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth.
2. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly.
Sorry, but Microsoft does not have exclusive control over the means for producing software. In fact, the only true monopoly in the country is the company that makes those shirt collar boards.
Parent should really stop trolling.
I am so sick of all this: "Look at what Microsoft is able to do because they are a monopoly!" No, they are not a monopoly. Does there exist another operating system in direct competition with Windows. Why, yes, there are several... Many that even run that on the same exact hardware. Kind of hard to be a monopoly when you actually HAVE competitors... so stop with the anti-Microsoft BS. You are just as guilty of FUD as them.
And by the way, I am posting this from Gentoo Linux. Who would have thought it possible to have such a fine operating system with a monopoly in the market?
... But it is certainly useful for those of us who are forced to use Windows in a particular environment (like say, at work), but would like to be able to run KDE applications from Windows.
Also, as people become more comfortable with open source applications (Mozilla Firefox, for example) on their Windows platform, I think they will be more likely to migrate to another operating system when they see that all of the applications they are accustomed to are available under another OS.
Slashdot Mirror
Out of curiousity, what is it that you are doing via an SSH session to a Linux box and can be done on an OS X terminal but cannot be done with cygwin on Windows?
Actually, you would be surprised. I bought a gateway laptop with a 15.4 inch widescreen (native resolution: 1280x800) and Intel Extreme Graphics 2 integrated video adapter. Now, you would think that the video BIOS would advertise its 1280x800 resolution, but it does not, because that particular adapter isn't mean for that resolution. So I had to download a tool called 855resolution that lets you trick the video BIOS into advertising one of its existing modes as 1280x800 in order to get it to work with Xorg.
Why do you assume that Joe Schmoe won't be able to use a firewall just as he does now? For people at home, they could have a router connected to the WiMAX network, and then have their own 802.11b/g lan for their home behind a firewall on said router. Alternatively, there are always software firewalls, and I'm sure some clever wireless adapter manufacturers will soon also start building little hardware firewalls directly into the adapters themselves.
Actually, the Hitachi horror stories are pretty bad. I worked for a consulting firm that had me staffed at a very large chemical company that will remain un-named. Everyone in the company used IBM T40 laptops equiped with Hitachi drives. In the first year of the new workstation roll out, about 8% of the population (so roughly 4000) had dead hard drives. Yikes!
It sounds like you're not running X in the Dell's native resolution. If for some reason it just won't run in its native resolution, have you tried pressing fn+f7 or whatever it is to make the screen stretch? I'd check out your xorg.conf to make sure the resolution you're running in is the native resolution of the display first, though.
Stable if you have a 32-bit system, anyway. I tried using it as recently as a month ago on my Athlon 64, and during compilation I got all kinds of warnings about converting a pointer to integer of different size. Amazingly, it actually seemed to run, but the display was totally hosed, making it completely useless.
Well, to be fair to x86 (or specifically, x86-64), though, gcc pretty much sucks ass at floating point optimization. Try using PathScale's c++ compiler on an Opteron to compile nbench, run nbench, and then recompile it with gcc and run it again and look at the floating point index for both. You'll see what I mean... so its possible, and quite likely, that gcc is just better at floating point optimization on a G5.
This "benchmark" doesn't really tell us much about the actual performance of the hardware itself...
I think the other aspect is that, as a developer, you can develop console games that are gauranteed to look/function the same on every machine they are played on. This has to be enticing, atleast for serious gaming houses that produce a good number of titles. And, of course, as a user, you are gauranteed to get the same experience as everyone else. This is the primary reason I bought an Xbox. I want availability of good games, and I want to be assured they will just work, and I will enjoy them as much as anyone else.
I think also, the (somewhat) limited hardware of console systems (atleast compared to high-end, brand new PCs) forces developers to be more creative, and not just focus on something that looks incredible. Doom 3, for example, while it looks fantastic, isn't all that fun.
Actually, I can see this being used quite a bit for parodies... www.whitehouse.xxx, anyone?
Since I'm sure you're still looking for responses to this, I ask: If my argument is so weak, why do you continue to respond? I'm especially amused that you went to all of that trouble to look for claims that Microsoft is a monopoly. Well, unfortunately, for you, it was a waste of time. I actually know economists, as well as lawyers (hmm, my girlfriend works for a law firm and her father is also a lawyer for a different firm) and have had this very conversation with them. I'm sure they are probably more qualified than a journalist who reports for the economist. Don't you know the media is owned by the corporations anyway?
I'll now take your approach to let you know that you are not any different than any other moron. You made some comment in your journal about your provocative posts. Please... you are uttering the same, mindless crap that 90% of the slashdot karma-whoring, MS-bashing public does. You're like the person who shops at Hot Topic because you think that makes you unique. Please, for everyone's sake, start thinking on your own, instead of regurgitating that which all of the other idiots on here repeat over and over again. "You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake." Am I getting through to you at all here? What this forum needs is people who are capable of rational thought, rather than repeating the same worthless arguments over and over again, and then bashing people in their responses, just as I am doing right now, because it appears to be the only way to get through to your kind.
And in fact, my fellow engineers do not believe that Microsoft has a monopoly. If they did, we sure as shit wouldn't be working WITH MSFT on certain things. Come on, now... use your head. Why do you think MSFT has come to having "monopolistic power" anyway? Because they make products that are easy for people to use, and people then buy them. I sure hope you've never purchased any of their products (either directly or indirectly [such as by purchasing a new computer with Windows pre-installed), otherwise you're being awfully hypocritical.
Beyond that, you should consider taking an economics class, rather than trying to act like an expert on things just because you've read something on slashdot or looked something up on google. But then, I guess that wouldn't be the slashdot way.
Slashdot: FUD for psuedo-experts. Stuff that we like to repeat over and over to each other to make ourselves feel important.Actually, my profession is quite relevant... I'm a software engineer working for a company that is not Microsoft. So, I guess its a pretty good thing for me that they aren't a monopoly, eh?
And I would like you to show me where they have been ruled a monopoly, rather than being ruled as having "monopolistic power". If you're not going to ask an economist (who would tell you that they are, in fact, NOT a monopoly), then you can just try this google search:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=microsoft+isThe whole point is, calling them a "monopoly" is where the FUD comes in, because it is tehcnically incorrect. Its similar to labeling people who support free software as communists. And the fact that you've felt the need to personally attack me in every one of your responses doesn't do much to support your argument.
monopolistic power != monopoly. I am quite aware of the justice department rulings. If you don't believe my professional opinion, you should ask an economist if Microsoft is a monopoly.
1. Exclusive control by one group of the means of producing or selling a commodity or service: "Monopoly frequently... arises from government support or from collusive agreements among individuals" (Milton Friedman). 2. Law. A right granted by a government giving exclusive control over a specified commercial activity to a single party. 3. 1. A company or group having exclusive control over a commercial activity. 2. A commodity or service so controlled. 4. 1. Exclusive possession or control: arrogantly claims to have a monopoly on the truth. 2. Something that is exclusively possessed or controlled: showed that scientific achievement is not a male monopoly.
Sorry, but Microsoft does not have exclusive control over the means for producing software. In fact, the only true monopoly in the country is the company that makes those shirt collar boards. Parent should really stop trolling.
I am so sick of all this: "Look at what Microsoft is able to do because they are a monopoly!" No, they are not a monopoly. Does there exist another operating system in direct competition with Windows. Why, yes, there are several... Many that even run that on the same exact hardware. Kind of hard to be a monopoly when you actually HAVE competitors... so stop with the anti-Microsoft BS. You are just as guilty of FUD as them.
And by the way, I am posting this from Gentoo Linux. Who would have thought it possible to have such a fine operating system with a monopoly in the market?
... But it is certainly useful for those of us who are forced to use Windows in a particular environment (like say, at work), but would like to be able to run KDE applications from Windows. Also, as people become more comfortable with open source applications (Mozilla Firefox, for example) on their Windows platform, I think they will be more likely to migrate to another operating system when they see that all of the applications they are accustomed to are available under another OS.