Or perhaps they should have just written better code. More often than not, these bottlenecks can be fixed with proper caching of content. PHP is generally not what fails in these instances, it's usually the database server. As someone who works at a corporation that serves well over 10 million page views a day using PHP (and that's not even counting the advertising subsystems, which are also written in PHP), I can say this is almost always the case. Using C++ will also not solve performance issues with Apache, or your database server.
There is a very good chance that rewriting websites in C++ will not solve performance problems. Perhaps you should actually do some research before you offer up your opinion.
Probably a mix of both. I'm gainfully employed as a software developer, and manage to provide support for a few applications which the company and I use on a regular basis. However, I could also agree that some of them also do it from their mother's basements.
Except Microsoft hasn't claimed this to be an innovation. That's a statement slashdot users put in Microsoft's mouth so they can then turn around and make statements exactly like yours.
We have a mini at the office here, it's a neat little device. I'm not partial to OS X, so I wouldn't get one myself, but we do have a dev here who loves it completely and is highly productive on it.
If you're unsure, it might be an idea to take a run down to an apple retailer and test drive one. Package management, and moving around in the OS is different enough that if you've never used OS X before, it will take a little getting used to. If nothing else, the mini's formfactor and near-0 noise output make it quite useful as a media center, especially if you get the TV-out adapter.
For other common needs, such as word processing, email, web, etc, etc, it also works well. While the game selection is limited, it's not non-existant. Popular games (unreal tournament, world of warcraft, etc) can be found for it. So, it's probably not the greatest gaming rig, but you can find entertaining things to purchase for it.
--
Anyhow, now that the positive points (in my opinion) have been stated: Macs are not for me, and this is why. I don't like how they laid out the interface, I dislike how some things are "forced" on you. Apple seems to think it's way is the only right way when it comes to the UI. I find things like the dock to be an annoying nuisence which I just can't seem to get rid of. I also don't like the finder. It feels like a really dumbed-down version of explorer that I just don't feel productive in. To me, OS X feels very much like working in a straight jacket. Then there is Apple, a company that is all about the dollar, regardless of the end user. I was a//gs owner when those machines were popular, and I loved it to death. I remember quite clearly the devide Jobs purposefully created, and how he treated programmers and engineers who were at the company. Jobs left us all holding lemons. He didn't care that he was throwing a large userbase out in to the cold, he just wanted to make his buck. Many of the old camp of Apple ][e and//gs users left Apple for IBM PC compatibles at that point, and never went back. I have nothing but contempt for Steve Jobs.
Apple is not a shining bright light at the end of every tunnel, they are a corporation, their motive is profit. I wish people would stop looking at Apple as some kind of saviour, and start seeing them as the monopoly they are.
No, it's stupid and arrogant to think that a Mac is the right solution for anyone you come across. It's also stupid and arrogant to disregard friends and family just because they didn't want to get a Mac. If you don't want to help them, just don't. Don't use their choice of computer as a pretext to snub them. Just because *you* like Macs doesn't mean everyone does.
Sort of like your last comment, where you assume I don't know what those words mean. I think that IS stupid, and arrogant.
I dub the parent comment "Welcome to the flame of today".
This isn't about unix, nor is it about competing with Unix. This is about fixing a long-standing user complaint. Why must there always be a comparison? Another fine example of "it doesn't matter how many problems get fixed, we'll be here to bitch about it anyway"
Compared against other hardware of similar performance, it's not cheap. it's not compatible with most popular software available (since most of it is for Windows), and if you think needs are going to remain consistant, you're lying to yourself. A Mac, out of the box, is not a cure-all. A starting point, sure, but don't make it sound like it's a 'one-shoe-fits-all' appliance that they will never need to modify or add to. A lot of people can't move to Macs, because they use software which simply isn't available on the Mac. A lot of specialty software is this way. I can understand you not wanting to be tech support for people, but telling people it's because they don't own a Mac is stupid and arrogant.
I have no problems with people recommending a Mac as a possible solution to personal computing woes, but people are more often than not dishonest or omissive about the drawbacks of the systems they recommend.
Thanks for that tip - I know I'll be moving. Slashdot is little more than a cesspool of salivating morons who are largely incapable of seeing the flaws in the things they support, but have no problems pointing out everyone else's. Their "editorial", if that's what you can call it, is comprised of slanted view which are crafted to make opensource look better than everything else. They don't care about the turth of issues, and more to the point, neither do most of the people who come here. Riding with blinders on is a favorite fashion of the Slashdot readership.
Slashdot summerized:
1) Bash Microsoft. 2) Bash any software which isn't open (unless it's written by Apple - we'll call that "innovation"). 3) Praise Linux, hide it's flaws. 4) Praise Apple, because, yeah, they do no wrong. Riiiight. 5) Praise people who use the same old tired "In Soviet Russia...", "??? Profit!" and "...but how about a beowulf cluster of those!".
I used to like coming here, but the editors troll worse than the users do.
I wasn't actually here to shun anything. I'm here to state that I have a preference that Nintendo doesn't fulfill. That is all. I wasn't suggesting that you not buy your Nintendo and live happily ever after. But then, feel free to read the rest of the posts here - you're right at home with the rest that couldn't seem to get my point either.
You're right, kids games are made for all consoles. But lots more are made for the nintendo platform than anything else. By simulator, I meant it as a generality - something that attempts to recreate real-world conditions while maintaining some kind of interesting fun gameplay. I'll agree that games of this type are generally not good on any console, with the exception of racing and sports simulators.
Listing off a bunch of GBA titles is silly, since the GBA didn't have the power to create anything that I wanted to see. Some of them have been ported to other consoles (you fail to mention this) - consoles which I feel have a better selection of games than what Nintendo is pushing.
But they don't necessarily make for a game I want to play either, which was the point of the original post. You do remember the original post, right? My problem isn't with them making kids games (or adult games with cartoonish graphics) it's that they don't make the games I want to play.
I'm starting to think it's you that doesn't get it.
Yep, 'family friendly' AKA 'games for kids' works for Nintendo, that's not a problem. However, I wasn't saying it was a problem for Nintendo at all, in fact, it's probably why they've been on the map this long.
I'm saying that it's a problem for me when Nintendo (or it's 3rd party game developers) don't produce the games I want to play. That is all. You can unbunch your panties now. If you enjoy those games, I'm happy for you. It's all about enjoying it, right? Well, I don't! You know, it's that whole 'personal preference' thing.
Before: the graphics were cartoonish because those were the limits of the hardware. Now: the graphics are cartoonish because they want to add to the cuteness factor.
Not to say all 'cartoonish' games are kid's games, but many of them are. I didn't dismiss many of these games out of hand either - I've played them. I didn't like them. I'm sorry if it bothers you that I'm more disposed towards tactical strategy, gratuitous violence, adult humor and simulators as opposed to cute characters jumping from block to block over lava to eat fruit for health.
You're saying I should buy a console for one game? If it's a good game, and it's not made by Nintendo (don't quote me on this, I haven't researched it), it will soon be available for a platform more attuned to my tastes.
While I appreciate your description of the game (it sounds funny as hell) one game is not a reason to make an investment.
It doesn't matter to me who is making the games, as long as they're the games I want to play. Why would I care about who is making them and who is living off of console licensing rights? I didn't like Resident Evil (predictable, not scary, fixed camera angles, linear gameplay), I didn't care for Zelda (Games like Baldurs Gate and planescape torment really raised my expectations for how an RPG should be), and I don't have a clue what 'SSB:M' is, why must everyone use an acronym for everything?
Goldeneye was awful, as was every other FPS style game for the N64/Gamecube, mainly due to the controllers - perhaps it will be different with the new controllers, I can only speculate until they are available for the rest of us to try. 4-way multiplayer on one TV where everyone can see what everyone else is doing? Thanks, but I don't like sharing my display with everyone else in the room unless it's a genre that can do it right, like a fighting (hand to hand) game. I'm not ignoring the fact that Nintendo isn't making the only games for their system, I'm saying the titles I want to play aren't there for that system.
I have absolutely no problem with you not owning a PSP. I'm well aware that Sony has a history of making bad hardware where platforms are concerned. I didn't get a PS 1 or 2 for that reason. The PSP has proven itself to me to be of a different level of quality than it's home platforms.
As for multiplayer, I don't get consoles to play online multiplayer games. I have a PC for that, which for my purposes is superior to any platform.
Interestingly, the only difference (aside from what we want out of a game unit) between you and I is that I respect your opinion. You obviously don't respect mine.
Wow. State one opinion about your own preference that doesn't follow the herd, and suddenly you're an ignorant troll. Slashdot truly is a magical place.
The point of my post was not to say that other people wouldn't enjoy them, it's that I wouldn't enjoy them. I've already done my round with those kinds of games, they don't do it for me. Why does everyone seem to have a problem with this? Did you even read the entire post?
That's right, but they do have a history that leans towards a strong disposition towards developing more kid's titles than anything else. Perhaps that appeals to you, it doesn't to me.
Slashdot Mirror
Or perhaps they should have just written better code. More often than not, these bottlenecks can be fixed with proper caching of content. PHP is generally not what fails in these instances, it's usually the database server. As someone who works at a corporation that serves well over 10 million page views a day using PHP (and that's not even counting the advertising subsystems, which are also written in PHP), I can say this is almost always the case. Using C++ will also not solve performance issues with Apache, or your database server.
There is a very good chance that rewriting websites in C++ will not solve performance problems. Perhaps you should actually do some research before you offer up your opinion.
Probably a mix of both. I'm gainfully employed as a software developer, and manage to provide support for a few applications which the company and I use on a regular basis. However, I could also agree that some of them also do it from their mother's basements.
Except Microsoft hasn't claimed this to be an innovation. That's a statement slashdot users put in Microsoft's mouth so they can then turn around and make statements exactly like yours.
We have a mini at the office here, it's a neat little device. I'm not partial to OS X, so I wouldn't get one myself, but we do have a dev here who loves it completely and is highly productive on it.
//gs owner when those machines were popular, and I loved it to death. I remember quite clearly the devide Jobs purposefully created, and how he treated programmers and engineers who were at the company. Jobs left us all holding lemons. He didn't care that he was throwing a large userbase out in to the cold, he just wanted to make his buck. Many of the old camp of Apple ][e and //gs users left Apple for IBM PC compatibles at that point, and never went back. I have nothing but contempt for Steve Jobs.
If you're unsure, it might be an idea to take a run down to an apple retailer and test drive one. Package management, and moving around in the OS is different enough that if you've never used OS X before, it will take a little getting used to. If nothing else, the mini's formfactor and near-0 noise output make it quite useful as a media center, especially if you get the TV-out adapter.
For other common needs, such as word processing, email, web, etc, etc, it also works well. While the game selection is limited, it's not non-existant. Popular games (unreal tournament, world of warcraft, etc) can be found for it. So, it's probably not the greatest gaming rig, but you can find entertaining things to purchase for it.
--
Anyhow, now that the positive points (in my opinion) have been stated: Macs are not for me, and this is why. I don't like how they laid out the interface, I dislike how some things are "forced" on you. Apple seems to think it's way is the only right way when it comes to the UI. I find things like the dock to be an annoying nuisence which I just can't seem to get rid of. I also don't like the finder. It feels like a really dumbed-down version of explorer that I just don't feel productive in. To me, OS X feels very much like working in a straight jacket. Then there is Apple, a company that is all about the dollar, regardless of the end user. I was a
Apple is not a shining bright light at the end of every tunnel, they are a corporation, their motive is profit. I wish people would stop looking at Apple as some kind of saviour, and start seeing them as the monopoly they are.
No, it's stupid and arrogant to think that a Mac is the right solution for anyone you come across. It's also stupid and arrogant to disregard friends and family just because they didn't want to get a Mac. If you don't want to help them, just don't. Don't use their choice of computer as a pretext to snub them. Just because *you* like Macs doesn't mean everyone does. Sort of like your last comment, where you assume I don't know what those words mean. I think that IS stupid, and arrogant.
Who said it was an innovation? Thanks for trolling!
I dub the parent comment "Welcome to the flame of today". This isn't about unix, nor is it about competing with Unix. This is about fixing a long-standing user complaint. Why must there always be a comparison? Another fine example of "it doesn't matter how many problems get fixed, we'll be here to bitch about it anyway"
But if it was Google walmarting a bunch of small local businesses, well, that's ok because it's Google!
Compared against other hardware of similar performance, it's not cheap. it's not compatible with most popular software available (since most of it is for Windows), and if you think needs are going to remain consistant, you're lying to yourself. A Mac, out of the box, is not a cure-all. A starting point, sure, but don't make it sound like it's a 'one-shoe-fits-all' appliance that they will never need to modify or add to. A lot of people can't move to Macs, because they use software which simply isn't available on the Mac. A lot of specialty software is this way. I can understand you not wanting to be tech support for people, but telling people it's because they don't own a Mac is stupid and arrogant.
I have no problems with people recommending a Mac as a possible solution to personal computing woes, but people are more often than not dishonest or omissive about the drawbacks of the systems they recommend.
Thanks for that tip - I know I'll be moving. Slashdot is little more than a cesspool of salivating morons who are largely incapable of seeing the flaws in the things they support, but have no problems pointing out everyone else's. Their "editorial", if that's what you can call it, is comprised of slanted view which are crafted to make opensource look better than everything else. They don't care about the turth of issues, and more to the point, neither do most of the people who come here. Riding with blinders on is a favorite fashion of the Slashdot readership.
Slashdot summerized:
1) Bash Microsoft.
2) Bash any software which isn't open (unless it's written by Apple - we'll call that "innovation").
3) Praise Linux, hide it's flaws.
4) Praise Apple, because, yeah, they do no wrong. Riiiight.
5) Praise people who use the same old tired "In Soviet Russia...", "??? Profit!" and "...but how about a beowulf cluster of those!".
I used to like coming here, but the editors troll worse than the users do.
no problem
#include <viagra.h>
I wasn't actually here to shun anything. I'm here to state that I have a preference that Nintendo doesn't fulfill. That is all. I wasn't suggesting that you not buy your Nintendo and live happily ever after. But then, feel free to read the rest of the posts here - you're right at home with the rest that couldn't seem to get my point either.
You're right, kids games are made for all consoles. But lots more are made for the nintendo platform than anything else. By simulator, I meant it as a generality - something that attempts to recreate real-world conditions while maintaining some kind of interesting fun gameplay. I'll agree that games of this type are generally not good on any console, with the exception of racing and sports simulators.
Listing off a bunch of GBA titles is silly, since the GBA didn't have the power to create anything that I wanted to see. Some of them have been ported to other consoles (you fail to mention this) - consoles which I feel have a better selection of games than what Nintendo is pushing.
But they don't necessarily make for a game I want to play either, which was the point of the original post. You do remember the original post, right? My problem isn't with them making kids games (or adult games with cartoonish graphics) it's that they don't make the games I want to play.
I'm starting to think it's you that doesn't get it.
Yep, 'family friendly' AKA 'games for kids' works for Nintendo, that's not a problem. However, I wasn't saying it was a problem for Nintendo at all, in fact, it's probably why they've been on the map this long.
I'm saying that it's a problem for me when Nintendo (or it's 3rd party game developers) don't produce the games I want to play. That is all. You can unbunch your panties now. If you enjoy those games, I'm happy for you. It's all about enjoying it, right? Well, I don't! You know, it's that whole 'personal preference' thing.
Before: the graphics were cartoonish because those were the limits of the hardware.
Now: the graphics are cartoonish because they want to add to the cuteness factor.
Not to say all 'cartoonish' games are kid's games, but many of them are. I didn't dismiss many of these games out of hand either - I've played them. I didn't like them. I'm sorry if it bothers you that I'm more disposed towards tactical strategy, gratuitous violence, adult humor and simulators as opposed to cute characters jumping from block to block over lava to eat fruit for health.
You're saying I should buy a console for one game? If it's a good game, and it's not made by Nintendo (don't quote me on this, I haven't researched it), it will soon be available for a platform more attuned to my tastes.
While I appreciate your description of the game (it sounds funny as hell) one game is not a reason to make an investment.
SURPRISE :D they DO make kids games! Imagine that! Nothing I said was false.
It doesn't matter to me who is making the games, as long as they're the games I want to play. Why would I care about who is making them and who is living off of console licensing rights? I didn't like Resident Evil (predictable, not scary, fixed camera angles, linear gameplay), I didn't care for Zelda (Games like Baldurs Gate and planescape torment really raised my expectations for how an RPG should be), and I don't have a clue what 'SSB:M' is, why must everyone use an acronym for everything?
Goldeneye was awful, as was every other FPS style game for the N64/Gamecube, mainly due to the controllers - perhaps it will be different with the new controllers, I can only speculate until they are available for the rest of us to try. 4-way multiplayer on one TV where everyone can see what everyone else is doing? Thanks, but I don't like sharing my display with everyone else in the room unless it's a genre that can do it right, like a fighting (hand to hand) game. I'm not ignoring the fact that Nintendo isn't making the only games for their system, I'm saying the titles I want to play aren't there for that system.
Thanks for that amazing insight. I'll be sure to pass it on to /dev/null.
I have absolutely no problem with you not owning a PSP. I'm well aware that Sony has a history of making bad hardware where platforms are concerned. I didn't get a PS 1 or 2 for that reason. The PSP has proven itself to me to be of a different level of quality than it's home platforms.
As for multiplayer, I don't get consoles to play online multiplayer games. I have a PC for that, which for my purposes is superior to any platform.
Interestingly, the only difference (aside from what we want out of a game unit) between you and I is that I respect your opinion. You obviously don't respect mine.
Wow. State one opinion about your own preference that doesn't follow the herd, and suddenly you're an ignorant troll. Slashdot truly is a magical place.
Wow, out of a pile of negative responses taking my post as some sort of personal attack, someone actually understands.
The point of my post was not to say that other people wouldn't enjoy them, it's that I wouldn't enjoy them. I've already done my round with those kinds of games, they don't do it for me. Why does everyone seem to have a problem with this? Did you even read the entire post?
That's right, but they do have a history that leans towards a strong disposition towards developing more kid's titles than anything else. Perhaps that appeals to you, it doesn't to me.