but I thought the deal was that macs "just worked". That they were "intuitive". It's probably true though that anyone who'd dare criticise a mac doesn't "actually want" one. I guess he just not part of the team. My question is why he just nitpicked on small concerns.
How is a mac "better integrated"? It's basically a PC with a PowerPC processor in it. Same memory, graphics, ports disk, CD...what's integrated in a mac that's not integrated in a PC? In fact, what is unique about a mac's hardware at all besides the processor?
With mac hardware you can get a PC with a nice case and a processor that's almost as good (G5) or low power but hopelessly outperformed (anything else). Enjoy your vendor lockin and your 100 dpi screens.
It does though. Without OS X, the mini is just a very small computer with poor expandability, a weak CPU and bad disk performance. It's price isn't bad for such a small box but it's not a great deal on a cheap computer either. The main value is that it runs OS X, though for the life of me I don't see how that's a real value...
You can't build a shuttle to similar specs. Every shuttle will have a vastly superior processor and a real 3.5" disk drive. It won't be as small but small wasn't important back when you couldn't get a small mac. Besides, I bet you could do a lot better than $950.
Ever tried opening a mini? What a joke. The disk drives are not only notebook drives but the slowest ones available as well. It's cool packaging but not the end-all-be-all of computing experience. Combine a mini with an Apple display and you have an ugly combination of wiring and power bricks. It's not nearly as elegant as it seems at first.
Of course it's form over function. Anytime you use a notebook hard drive and CD it's the case since both those devices cost more and perform worse than their desktop counterparts. The same can be said for the outdated processor and lack of memory expansion. The mini is all about style over function, but then that's true of the entire mac/OSX experience.
If there is nothing wrong with assembly language or cooperative scheduling then you would like DOS just fine. The argument is that it's insufficient for a general purpose computing platform, though I don't think it's fair to criticise Apple in the beginning for it. Fact is that they clung to it far, far after it was outdated. MS had full virtualization, memory protection and preemptive multitasking in the late 80's with Windows 386.
Cooperative scheduling works great for some applications but not for general purpose computing.
This is an old, tired rant that has proven itself to be completely unimportant. Performance disadvantages of the instruction set have been largely overcome technically and if software compatibility was as unimportant as you say then x86 would disappear. I say this having decades of x86 assembly experience myself.
What you say about Athlon 64 is hogwash. Care to offer evidence of your 99% speed advantage claim? AMD didn't break binary compatibility either.
Re:Solve poverty by developing reversible vasectom
on
The Hundred-Buck PC
·
· Score: 1
Perhaps we can start with you then. What gives your parents the right to bring a child into this world when it's seriously overpopulated already? Apparently you feel it's everyone else's fault. You sicken me.
Re:Solve poverty by developing reversible vasectom
on
The Hundred-Buck PC
·
· Score: 1
Why don't we have enforced abortions or simply euthanize the newborns instead? Don't need any medical breakthroughs for that. What good is a reversible vasectomy procedure unless you plan to make it mandatory on all males at an early age? If you leave it to choice the problem is no different than we have now.
Amazing how important a small computer is now that Apple has one. Wasn't so important years ago when SFF PC's existed and Apple was pushing repulsive iMac's.
When Apple introduces a G5 mini in the same form factor then they'll have really done something. Fact is that the G4 is optimally suited for such an application since it cares far more about power/heat than it does about performance.
Don't forget about the sizable external power supply when boasting about the mini's size. When both parts sit on your desk it isn't nearly as impressive. And yes, I have one. Yawn. OS X is stupid, that I now officially know.
AMD wasn't first to market with a 1GHz CPU. It was a virtual dead heat. AMD announced a couple days earlier but after Intel set its announce date. Any difference is irrelevent and PC makers did not use AMD processors much at that time.
All storage systems have checksums. They're built into the drives themselves, and any drive, when asked to read a block, can tell whether the data is readable or not via its own internal redundant data. Through this mechanism data recovery can take place potentially without any RAID at all. Of course, this doesn't protect against data path errors, but many systems have solutions for that as well. The whole comment is completely full of shit.
I have used their chairs, not that one specifically, and they are comfortable but expensive. They're marketed as high-image bulk office furniture. I doubt an individual would choose one without prior exposure to the brand if he were shopping for chairs.
My belief is that the choice is indicative of the original author desiring to get the coolest stuff on someone else's dime. I'm certain that the Mirra is a nice chair (if you aren't paying for it).
Why isn't it surprising? You expect Apple products to fail because of their "superior engineering"?
Since when does Apple push to have the smallest, lightest, longest-lasting anything? I suppose it's easier when you have a closed architecture with no direct ability to compare and no real requirement for high performance, yet both the iPod and the mini are outclassed both in size and battery life by the Toshiba and new Rio Carbon, respectively. Apple notebooks, in addition to being grossly uncompetitive in CPU power, cannot possibly compete with the hundreds of models of PC notebooks for sheer variety of size and function.
Making a battery last a long time doesn't "push the edge" of battery tech. Making it last a short time does. Batteries inherently prefer slow discharge rates. Perhaps Apple should push a little harder.
Curiously, Apple notebooks already have less than half the processor power of PC versions. You'd think with so little CPU they'd have an easier time of it. PC builders don't seem to have to reduce processor speeds to work.
I owned a 3G player and it was horrible. Had 4 friends with 3G's as well. All had the exact same problem though they didn't realize it. 3G players had bad batteries by design and I'm convinced it's 100% of production.
How long does yours last off the charger when you aren't using it? Any iPod competitor would last a month or more. 3G iPods won't come close to a week.
The 1G players weren't the worst ones for battery problems. Even the best, properly working 3G players had crappy batteries. Take a properly working 3G player, charge it and remove it from charge. Three days later it's mostly dead.
Don't have a 4G, but the 1G players were by far the best of the first 3.
Because it's cool, fashionable and expensive just like the other solutions to these so-called problems would be. It's hard to judge comfort using a picture.
What you want is indentation that's consistent, standardized, and appears the same to everybody.
You will never get a file that mixes tabs and spaces to look right if people have different tab-stop settings. It's impossible and impossibly stupid to do.
A tab moves to the next 8 column stop. Any other definition is a bastardization used by lazy programmers. Some editors get this right, and in doing so they become incompatible with some programmers' stupid idea that you should indent only with tabs and set tab stops to your preference. If all members of a project agree on what a tab stop is then there would be no issue.
The "great gods" of K&R chose their format based on what would fit best on a small page and would be cheapest to publish. Those very "gods" admitted that the style would otherwise not be their preference. Curious how stupid reasons for making decisions somehow come to be believed as being genious. The K&R style blows.
Tabs and spaces shouldn't be a problem unless your editor is stupid. Perhaps you should turn code auto-generation off. You really need that?
Slashdot Mirror
but I thought the deal was that macs "just worked". That they were "intuitive". It's probably true though that anyone who'd dare criticise a mac doesn't "actually want" one. I guess he just not part of the team. My question is why he just nitpicked on small concerns.
How is a mac "better integrated"? It's basically a PC with a PowerPC processor in it. Same memory, graphics, ports disk, CD...what's integrated in a mac that's not integrated in a PC? In fact, what is unique about a mac's hardware at all besides the processor?
With mac hardware you can get a PC with a nice case and a processor that's almost as good (G5) or low power but hopelessly outperformed (anything else). Enjoy your vendor lockin and your 100 dpi screens.
It does though. Without OS X, the mini is just a very small computer with poor expandability, a weak CPU and bad disk performance. It's price isn't bad for such a small box but it's not a great deal on a cheap computer either. The main value is that it runs OS X, though for the life of me I don't see how that's a real value...
You can't build a shuttle to similar specs. Every shuttle will have a vastly superior processor and a real 3.5" disk drive. It won't be as small but small wasn't important back when you couldn't get a small mac. Besides, I bet you could do a lot better than $950.
Ever tried opening a mini? What a joke. The disk drives are not only notebook drives but the slowest ones available as well. It's cool packaging but not the end-all-be-all of computing experience. Combine a mini with an Apple display and you have an ugly combination of wiring and power bricks. It's not nearly as elegant as it seems at first.
bullshit
I see Apple has now invented the small form factor PC. Just think---a few months ago it wasn't even important.
Of course it's form over function. Anytime you use a notebook hard drive and CD it's the case since both those devices cost more and perform worse than their desktop counterparts. The same can be said for the outdated processor and lack of memory expansion. The mini is all about style over function, but then that's true of the entire mac/OSX experience.
If there is nothing wrong with assembly language or cooperative scheduling then you would like DOS just fine. The argument is that it's insufficient for a general purpose computing platform, though I don't think it's fair to criticise Apple in the beginning for it. Fact is that they clung to it far, far after it was outdated. MS had full virtualization, memory protection and preemptive multitasking in the late 80's with Windows 386.
Cooperative scheduling works great for some applications but not for general purpose computing.
This is an old, tired rant that has proven itself to be completely unimportant. Performance disadvantages of the instruction set have been largely overcome technically and if software compatibility was as unimportant as you say then x86 would disappear. I say this having decades of x86 assembly experience myself.
What you say about Athlon 64 is hogwash. Care to offer evidence of your 99% speed advantage claim? AMD didn't break binary compatibility either.
Perhaps we can start with you then. What gives your parents the right to bring a child into this world when it's seriously overpopulated already? Apparently you feel it's everyone else's fault. You sicken me.
Why don't we have enforced abortions or simply euthanize the newborns instead? Don't need any medical breakthroughs for that. What good is a reversible vasectomy procedure unless you plan to make it mandatory on all males at an early age? If you leave it to choice the problem is no different than we have now.
Amazing how important a small computer is now that Apple has one. Wasn't so important years ago when SFF PC's existed and Apple was pushing repulsive iMac's.
When Apple introduces a G5 mini in the same form factor then they'll have really done something. Fact is that the G4 is optimally suited for such an application since it cares far more about power/heat than it does about performance.
Don't forget about the sizable external power supply when boasting about the mini's size. When both parts sit on your desk it isn't nearly as impressive. And yes, I have one. Yawn. OS X is stupid, that I now officially know.
but if you want the Apple keyboard for use with your mini you'll be buying the stupid mouse as well. Otherwise I completely agree with you.
AMD wasn't first to market with a 1GHz CPU. It was a virtual dead heat. AMD announced a couple days earlier but after Intel set its announce date. Any difference is irrelevent and PC makers did not use AMD processors much at that time.
All storage systems have checksums. They're built into the drives themselves, and any drive, when asked to read a block, can tell whether the data is readable or not via its own internal redundant data. Through this mechanism data recovery can take place potentially without any RAID at all. Of course, this doesn't protect against data path errors, but many systems have solutions for that as well. The whole comment is completely full of shit.
I have used their chairs, not that one specifically, and they are comfortable but expensive. They're marketed as high-image bulk office furniture. I doubt an individual would choose one without prior exposure to the brand if he were shopping for chairs.
My belief is that the choice is indicative of the original author desiring to get the coolest stuff on someone else's dime. I'm certain that the Mirra is a nice chair (if you aren't paying for it).
Hard to do when you are traveling. Why should I be tethered to a charger daily on a device that's supposed to be portable?
I do agree that iPods are for the trendy, however. Seems totally consistent with the marketing campaign.
Why isn't it surprising? You expect Apple products to fail because of their "superior engineering"?
Since when does Apple push to have the smallest, lightest, longest-lasting anything? I suppose it's easier when you have a closed architecture with no direct ability to compare and no real requirement for high performance, yet both the iPod and the mini are outclassed both in size and battery life by the Toshiba and new Rio Carbon, respectively. Apple notebooks, in addition to being grossly uncompetitive in CPU power, cannot possibly compete with the hundreds of models of PC notebooks for sheer variety of size and function.
Making a battery last a long time doesn't "push the edge" of battery tech. Making it last a short time does. Batteries inherently prefer slow discharge rates. Perhaps Apple should push a little harder.
Curiously, Apple notebooks already have less than half the processor power of PC versions. You'd think with so little CPU they'd have an easier time of it. PC builders don't seem to have to reduce processor speeds to work.
I owned a 3G player and it was horrible. Had 4 friends with 3G's as well. All had the exact same problem though they didn't realize it. 3G players had bad batteries by design and I'm convinced it's 100% of production.
How long does yours last off the charger when you aren't using it? Any iPod competitor would last a month or more. 3G iPods won't come close to a week.
The 1G players weren't the worst ones for battery problems. Even the best, properly working 3G players had crappy batteries. Take a properly working 3G player, charge it and remove it from charge. Three days later it's mostly dead.
Don't have a 4G, but the 1G players were by far the best of the first 3.
Because it's cool, fashionable and expensive just like the other solutions to these so-called problems would be. It's hard to judge comfort using a picture.
That's not genious. That's retarded.
What you want is indentation that's consistent, standardized, and appears the same to everybody.
You will never get a file that mixes tabs and spaces to look right if people have different tab-stop settings. It's impossible and impossibly stupid to do.
A tab moves to the next 8 column stop. Any other definition is a bastardization used by lazy programmers. Some editors get this right, and in doing so they become incompatible with some programmers' stupid idea that you should indent only with tabs and set tab stops to your preference. If all members of a project agree on what a tab stop is then there would be no issue.
The "great gods" of K&R chose their format based on what would fit best on a small page and would be cheapest to publish. Those very "gods" admitted that the style would otherwise not be their preference. Curious how stupid reasons for making decisions somehow come to be believed as being genious. The K&R style blows.
Tabs and spaces shouldn't be a problem unless your editor is stupid. Perhaps you should turn code auto-generation off. You really need that?