Which would be true, except the report says "Overall, as the BOM analysis below indicates, we think that
PS3 will cost about $900 initially to manufacture." Not to mention they set a chart that obviously indicates using simple addition to come up with the total--and is next to the same exact colum for "after 3 years" that IS added up correctly...
They F'ed up, plain and simple. And in a gloriously-silly fashion. (And while increasing the cost of things like the CELL by 50% from an estimate put out three months ago, and Blu-Ray by 350% from the estimate put out before that.)
They are not... how shall we say... inspiring my confidence.
Mongoose was saying (as I said above), that you would not have to ONLY shrink the die to 6x1 (which I don't estimate to be a huge difference, die-wise though it will certainly MAKE one), but also force the deactivation of an SPE (making it 5/6) or you will actually hurt yields. That I certainly agree with.
In fact, it's probably a good question as to whether THAT would actually affect yields positively for it, as though you decrease die size you are also decreasing the chances for flaws to appear only in an SPE and therefore not take the chip out entirely.
Certainly none of us have ANY of the math to provide obvious answers to these questions, however.;-)
...hence the reason they're going a not-often-done route (to my knowledge) and disabling an SPE (so that a flaw would have to be in another part of the chip or affect at least two SPE's) to improve yields. A better decision than to go with a 6x1 alone, so they would have to go 6x1 and ALSO disable an SPE to improve yields... I'm not sure what the yield difference would be, but obviously it's not so huge as to worry the STI partnership.
Depending on how others like IBM (not roping themselves into a single spec on one major device like Sony is doing to start) plan on branding their chip, and how others plan on moving in the future, it may even make much MORE sense than shrinking the amount of silicon occupied by SPE's, as each one "turned off" would simply be a different chip model to sell. (Much the same way nVidia and ATi take differently-performing chips and sell them in different fashion.) The Cell 8000 has all SPE's working, the Cell 7000 has one off, the Cell 6000 has two turned off...;-) In that case, the more surface area the SPE's take up becomes ADVANTAGEOUS, because you simply use that chip differently, as opposed to tossing it away, and the more area SPE's take up the more chance you have of flaws affecting THAT area (where the chip is still usable) versus in the PPE or FlexIO, etc., where you would toss out the whole chip.
We see this somewhat in GPU's, where a flaw may affect only a pipeline or two, but I don't think it's been easily accomplishable with CPU's before. With CELL it would appear that it does, and I hazard a guess that STI kept that well in mind when deciding which configuration to go with.
The PS3 may not be able to take full advantage of it right now (as it must have at least seven functioning SPE's), but who's to say they won't be finding uses for the other chips?
Disabling an SPE of their choice is fine. Likely it will increase yields better than a 6x1 alone (still a large chip, obviously) so they'd have to disable one on THAT, too, which would put only 5 SPE's at their disposal... Probably a performance hit they'd rather not take. (And, again I'll reiterate, I assume 8x1 is the format ALL the players involved would like to go with most often in the long run for high-computing devices, so the improvements they make on that now and improvements made broadscale.)
And yes, the announcement does read like a press release (especially since it WAS a press release;-) ), but at least it didn't come from their marketing division. Heh... Keep in mind he didn't say yields WERE a lot better than other chips--or even that they were "good" or "at expectations" yet--just that they are "learning faster." It is still a positive message around those who think the chip's complexity would ultimately hold it back and cause a more stagnant expense hole. (That being the case, they would be getting bottled up worse than other chips instead of improving faster.)
Regardless, in the end "we shall see." I just don't think settling on a 6x1 (still a 190-200mm^2 die) configuration would make much of a difference at all versus an 8x1.
Size doesn't matter as much as yields, and according to IBM, they seem to be pretty confident in them. Saving a tiny bit of extra silicon (the SPE's take up a little over half the silicon, so removing two would be somewhere between a 13% and 15% reduction) doesn't hurt as much in the long run as losing the extra power and versatility. Not to mention that's likely the form IBM and others want their server architectures/etc. to take right now, so the extra design and manufacturing processes for a different configuration wouldn't make much sense.
I don't think they've stumbled in that perspective, but I do think it will take longer for developers to take true advantage of the software, and like the shoddy PS2 tool support, Sony will still have the ability to mess up further development on their own machine. It also, in the meanwhile, gives their competition more time to distinguish themselves in other ways. (Those "other ways" that are way more of a deciding factor than silicon will ever be, regardless.;-) )
7. Parental filtering options -- Okay, I'm not aware of anyone else that bundles this in, so this may be new.
I don't see time-restricted computer use, but OSX has a pretty full control package:
Specifically add email addresses the user is allowed to correspond with, IM accounts they can talk to and websites they can visit (restricting all others), heavily restrict/customize what system preferences they can access or what files they can see in Finder, lock their ability to access printers or burn media, permit/deny their ability to run applications on an individual basis... Even, amusingly, looking up profanity in the Dictionary.;-)
They should definitely add time-restricted access, though. That's a good tool for parental management. (And with things like the built-in webcams becoming more and more common, they should have device-by-device restrictions available as well and even lock port access.)
Linux:
Their hardware is unlikely to ever support my os, because (perhaps because they're a giant popular corporation) they like to keep it all closed up.
Spoken truly! How could you ever fit Linux onto a PERSONAL COMPUTER?!! Zounds! Let alone on a console! The mere concept is laughable by its very nature!
Or... um... have you been trying to load Knoppix on your set-top DVD player?
If they're really wanting to brand themselves as a World Series of Video Games--rather indicating all of them--shouldn't they be including more than a subsection of available video games? "PC + Xbox" is likely not even a plurality, let alone a majority. (Even less, as I'm fairly certain they're not including Java/Flash games in their number, either.)
Meanwhile, how can you even HAVE a good competition throughout the whole world? Every region has very different game preferences and staples. Somehow I can't see them encorporating a gigantic swath and then weighing things accordingly, so I figure it will be N.A.-centric as well.
...everyone has been dying to make their MCPC's 50%+ more expensive than the overpriced ones already out there?
Aren't people mainly looking for the thing to be able to record programs and serve up media, not replace every other HiFi device they (probably) already have hooked UP in their living rooms?
Are you kidding? You pretty much have to go to the highest base cost Dell home computer (starting at $1800) before you get built-in FireWire. Their laptops, at least, come with it more frequently.
I'd say 95% of the PC's we have coming through the shop still have no FireWire. (And of the ones that do, I haven't yet met a customer who knows what that port even is.)
Offhand, the way I see it would be an opaque "touchsleeve" that the iPod would rest in. The screen could be viewed the "normal" way it is now or wide-screened with a click (or just removing it from the sensitive casing). If it's in "normal" mode, in fact, the screen under the touchsleeve could always display the same clickwheel you're used to so it would be familiar-looking.;-)
A bit weird, perhaps, but it would get around the obvious huge expense of a big, high-resolution touchscreen, as well as making screen-smudging and -scratching not a factor. Put some beefier chips in it and some enterprising folk could make some neat games for it, too.;-) And DS ports! Hehe...
Unlike the Apple-Xerox transaction, Microsoft didn't pay Apple anything.
...not to mention they probably did more than a little code-leeching, since they had a whole lot of access to Apple's OS code for software development.
Apple, however, subsequently farked up the licensing agreement.
Ah, ok... I indeed thought you were referring to a "software issue" causing internal development tiffs that would make them not want to push anything for Blu-Ray.;-)
Overall I've expected them to do nothing in regards to Blu-Ray and for that not to matter (again, as with DVD, the software comes with the drives) except in a few circumstances (where MS has worked to make HD-DVD "work better" with their own software suites, etc.) That's fine. But I'm not in favor of the "incentivising" of one piece of hardware (where they should really not care about pushing anything at all) for OEM's monetarily in hopes of screwing around adoption of another standard. The "DVD wars" ultimately didn't do much other than cause some customer confusion, and while the "HD DVD wars" may pan out differently, MS should stand back as they did before and simply be fine with everyone always routing things through their damn OS.;-)
I do not, however, ultimately think their maneuvers will matter. That market is still driven almost wholly by the set-top entertainment sector. PC's only in the past year have recently bothered with using DVD's for much of anything, and few people care unduely to play their movies on their PC (a bit heavier influence here from the laptop sector), so no matter what MS is pulling, I think the adoption/culling/combination of HD-DVD/Blu-Ray/whatever will be settled in other markets first.
I just still think such maneuvers would be crass and counter-productive for "we the consumer."
Since when would that matter? All the software needed to run the disks will come with the player; MS themselves don't have to do step one. While they may well integrate iHD better with Vista, that means dick-all to simply being able to "play the media."
MS can go scratch in this case--it's all about them leveraging their OS to try to hurt Sony elsewhere so they can try to dominate that market (and by extension, the rest of the living room) as well.
There is no "software issue."
Just look at your nearest MMORPG if you want proof. Every single real life female that I know who plays MMORPG's *always* selects the super-beautiful heroine girl.
We must hang out with different females in real life. Everyone I know who plays MMORPG's *always* selects a male avatar, as they either want to be "something different" or just simply to avoid being treated "like a chick" all the time due to those super-beautiful heroines.
The ones playing the female avatars are invariably us guys.;-)
I think he's referring to their recent external DRM gaffes with CD's and all. Regardless, I've run across so many stupid protection schemes and questionable activities that if you're going to rebel against them on principle, then you're going to have to deal with 10% of the companies out there. That severly limits your entertainment choices and the ability to practice smart consumerism.;)
At this point I take stand against companies that have exhibited highly questionable practices then don't back off community pressure and are instead bullheaded about it. Sony, at least, has backed off with pie on its face and is giving consumer refunds. There are worse examples out there.
Not really misleading, as the "goodness" of consoles really ARE their games. Until they become fully-fledged computers/entertainment centers/etc, and have lots of other purpose right out of the box, it's the gaming experience that sends you one direction or another and makes you decide to open your wallet.
I usually come to the consoles late anyway, but I've been shifting away from the PC a bit more so they're looking more enticing... However seeing that I still HAVE a PC, the 360's opening salvo isn't enticing enough. They'll have to come out with one or two things highly compelling to make me look their way before I see what Sony and Nintendo are bringing to the field.
It may not always start simple, but invariably they will come. I'm not sure what technical had to come to unify the + and - formats for DVD, but it became more and more common. Will HD-DVD/BR play be more complicated? Undoubtedly. But if all you have to do is come out with a more complex laser head and control chips...?
Like as not, unless the two sides are willing to meet formally--or one is so snowballed by the other that it caves by default--manufacturers will get us to the same situation we have now anyway. People don't really know much about their DVD players, but they get the job done well. (We may get someone sidelined to a small niche like DVD-RAM, but any major format is all wrapped together at this point.)
Are you suggesting that Microsoft will turn down your money for a support call on a Windows XP BSOD because you have installed Firefox? I doubt it.
Actually, that was exactly his point. Remember the "you will pay through the nose for it" part? You're not too likely to get FREE support... not without a few "passing the buck" attempts. (HP and Dell ping-ponged me all night once over an AMAZINGLY SIMPLE MATTER. I wanted to firebomb them both. X_X )
Meanwhile, no one's talking about simple things where you're using one of a billion 3rd party pieces of software getting annulled... They're trying to think up situations at least reasonably analogous to the originating FUD and how it compares.
The main points:
- People saying "OMG EPA BANZ DDT AT FAULT!" are being simplistic and unscientific
- DDT is not banned from public health use is most places where malaria is endemic
- DDT is kept from most outdoor use because widespread and indescriminate use actually makes the spread of malaria worse... by increasing the mosquito population's resistance to DDT
- other insecticides are much better alternatives to DDT outdoors
...and to post the end of the article directly:
Most nations where malaria is a problem, and most health professionals working in the field of malaria control, support the targeted use of DDT, as part of the tool kit for malaria control. Most also agree that more cost-effective, less environmentally persistent alternatives are needed. There are some effective alternative chemicals for the control of adult mosquitoes, but preventing their further development is lack of invest ment by industry, because malaria is largely a disease of the poor.
Malaria is responsible for enormous suffering and death. The facts are readily available in the scientific literature. To blame a reduction in DDT usage for the death of 10-30 million people from malaria is not just simple-minded, it is demonstrably wrong. To blame a mythical, monolithic entity called the environmental lobby for the total reduction in DDT usage is not just paranoid, it is also demonstrably wrong.
Did you actually... um... read the letter? He goes on for paragraphs talking about how such comments are simple-minded bunk, that the DDT ban did not constitute an instantaneous ban in developing countries (who are still not averse to targetted use today), how widespread outdoor use was actually making the spread of malaria WORSE, how other chemicals are better-used for the purposes of malaria-control and other things they wanted to use DDT for...
Slashdot Mirror
Which would be true, except the report says "Overall, as the BOM analysis below indicates, we think that PS3 will cost about $900 initially to manufacture." Not to mention they set a chart that obviously indicates using simple addition to come up with the total--and is next to the same exact colum for "after 3 years" that IS added up correctly...
They F'ed up, plain and simple. And in a gloriously-silly fashion. (And while increasing the cost of things like the CELL by 50% from an estimate put out three months ago, and Blu-Ray by 350% from the estimate put out before that.)
They are not... how shall we say... inspiring my confidence.
Mongoose was saying (as I said above), that you would not have to ONLY shrink the die to 6x1 (which I don't estimate to be a huge difference, die-wise though it will certainly MAKE one), but also force the deactivation of an SPE (making it 5/6) or you will actually hurt yields. That I certainly agree with.
;-)
In fact, it's probably a good question as to whether THAT would actually affect yields positively for it, as though you decrease die size you are also decreasing the chances for flaws to appear only in an SPE and therefore not take the chip out entirely.
Certainly none of us have ANY of the math to provide obvious answers to these questions, however.
...hence the reason they're going a not-often-done route (to my knowledge) and disabling an SPE (so that a flaw would have to be in another part of the chip or affect at least two SPE's) to improve yields. A better decision than to go with a 6x1 alone, so they would have to go 6x1 and ALSO disable an SPE to improve yields... I'm not sure what the yield difference would be, but obviously it's not so huge as to worry the STI partnership.
;-) In that case, the more surface area the SPE's take up becomes ADVANTAGEOUS, because you simply use that chip differently, as opposed to tossing it away, and the more area SPE's take up the more chance you have of flaws affecting THAT area (where the chip is still usable) versus in the PPE or FlexIO, etc., where you would toss out the whole chip.
Depending on how others like IBM (not roping themselves into a single spec on one major device like Sony is doing to start) plan on branding their chip, and how others plan on moving in the future, it may even make much MORE sense than shrinking the amount of silicon occupied by SPE's, as each one "turned off" would simply be a different chip model to sell. (Much the same way nVidia and ATi take differently-performing chips and sell them in different fashion.) The Cell 8000 has all SPE's working, the Cell 7000 has one off, the Cell 6000 has two turned off...
We see this somewhat in GPU's, where a flaw may affect only a pipeline or two, but I don't think it's been easily accomplishable with CPU's before. With CELL it would appear that it does, and I hazard a guess that STI kept that well in mind when deciding which configuration to go with.
The PS3 may not be able to take full advantage of it right now (as it must have at least seven functioning SPE's), but who's to say they won't be finding uses for the other chips?
Disabling an SPE of their choice is fine. Likely it will increase yields better than a 6x1 alone (still a large chip, obviously) so they'd have to disable one on THAT, too, which would put only 5 SPE's at their disposal... Probably a performance hit they'd rather not take. (And, again I'll reiterate, I assume 8x1 is the format ALL the players involved would like to go with most often in the long run for high-computing devices, so the improvements they make on that now and improvements made broadscale.)
;-) ), but at least it didn't come from their marketing division. Heh... Keep in mind he didn't say yields WERE a lot better than other chips--or even that they were "good" or "at expectations" yet--just that they are "learning faster." It is still a positive message around those who think the chip's complexity would ultimately hold it back and cause a more stagnant expense hole. (That being the case, they would be getting bottled up worse than other chips instead of improving faster.)
And yes, the announcement does read like a press release (especially since it WAS a press release
Regardless, in the end "we shall see." I just don't think settling on a 6x1 (still a 190-200mm^2 die) configuration would make much of a difference at all versus an 8x1.
Size doesn't matter as much as yields, and according to IBM, they seem to be pretty confident in them. Saving a tiny bit of extra silicon (the SPE's take up a little over half the silicon, so removing two would be somewhere between a 13% and 15% reduction) doesn't hurt as much in the long run as losing the extra power and versatility. Not to mention that's likely the form IBM and others want their server architectures/etc. to take right now, so the extra design and manufacturing processes for a different configuration wouldn't make much sense.
;-) )
I don't think they've stumbled in that perspective, but I do think it will take longer for developers to take true advantage of the software, and like the shoddy PS2 tool support, Sony will still have the ability to mess up further development on their own machine. It also, in the meanwhile, gives their competition more time to distinguish themselves in other ways. (Those "other ways" that are way more of a deciding factor than silicon will ever be, regardless.
...I find it completely ironic that their official report gets simple addition wrong.
7. Parental filtering options -- Okay, I'm not aware of anyone else that bundles this in, so this may be new.
;-)
I don't see time-restricted computer use, but OSX has a pretty full control package:
Specifically add email addresses the user is allowed to correspond with, IM accounts they can talk to and websites they can visit (restricting all others), heavily restrict/customize what system preferences they can access or what files they can see in Finder, lock their ability to access printers or burn media, permit/deny their ability to run applications on an individual basis... Even, amusingly, looking up profanity in the Dictionary.
They should definitely add time-restricted access, though. That's a good tool for parental management. (And with things like the built-in webcams becoming more and more common, they should have device-by-device restrictions available as well and even lock port access.)
Linux:
Their hardware is unlikely to ever support my os, because (perhaps because they're a giant popular corporation) they like to keep it all closed up.
Spoken truly! How could you ever fit Linux onto a PERSONAL COMPUTER?!! Zounds! Let alone on a console! The mere concept is laughable by its very nature!
Or... um... have you been trying to load Knoppix on your set-top DVD player?
...all of the plethora of Windows security holes detracts from 360 sales?
;-)
Methinks thou doth underestimate the forgetful nature of the this market too much, and their attraction to "shineys."
If they're really wanting to brand themselves as a World Series of Video Games--rather indicating all of them--shouldn't they be including more than a subsection of available video games? "PC + Xbox" is likely not even a plurality, let alone a majority. (Even less, as I'm fairly certain they're not including Java/Flash games in their number, either.)
Meanwhile, how can you even HAVE a good competition throughout the whole world? Every region has very different game preferences and staples. Somehow I can't see them encorporating a gigantic swath and then weighing things accordingly, so I figure it will be N.A.-centric as well.
Ah well... Gotta start somewhere, I suppose.
...everyone has been dying to make their MCPC's 50%+ more expensive than the overpriced ones already out there?
Aren't people mainly looking for the thing to be able to record programs and serve up media, not replace every other HiFi device they (probably) already have hooked UP in their living rooms?
Are you kidding? You pretty much have to go to the highest base cost Dell home computer (starting at $1800) before you get built-in FireWire. Their laptops, at least, come with it more frequently.
I'd say 95% of the PC's we have coming through the shop still have no FireWire. (And of the ones that do, I haven't yet met a customer who knows what that port even is.)
Pudding is tasty.
Offhand, the way I see it would be an opaque "touchsleeve" that the iPod would rest in. The screen could be viewed the "normal" way it is now or wide-screened with a click (or just removing it from the sensitive casing). If it's in "normal" mode, in fact, the screen under the touchsleeve could always display the same clickwheel you're used to so it would be familiar-looking. ;-)
;-) And DS ports! Hehe...
A bit weird, perhaps, but it would get around the obvious huge expense of a big, high-resolution touchscreen, as well as making screen-smudging and -scratching not a factor. Put some beefier chips in it and some enterprising folk could make some neat games for it, too.
Unlike the Apple-Xerox transaction, Microsoft didn't pay Apple anything.
...not to mention they probably did more than a little code-leeching, since they had a whole lot of access to Apple's OS code for software development.
Apple, however, subsequently farked up the licensing agreement.
Ah, ok... I indeed thought you were referring to a "software issue" causing internal development tiffs that would make them not want to push anything for Blu-Ray. ;-)
;-)
Overall I've expected them to do nothing in regards to Blu-Ray and for that not to matter (again, as with DVD, the software comes with the drives) except in a few circumstances (where MS has worked to make HD-DVD "work better" with their own software suites, etc.) That's fine. But I'm not in favor of the "incentivising" of one piece of hardware (where they should really not care about pushing anything at all) for OEM's monetarily in hopes of screwing around adoption of another standard. The "DVD wars" ultimately didn't do much other than cause some customer confusion, and while the "HD DVD wars" may pan out differently, MS should stand back as they did before and simply be fine with everyone always routing things through their damn OS.
I do not, however, ultimately think their maneuvers will matter. That market is still driven almost wholly by the set-top entertainment sector. PC's only in the past year have recently bothered with using DVD's for much of anything, and few people care unduely to play their movies on their PC (a bit heavier influence here from the laptop sector), so no matter what MS is pulling, I think the adoption/culling/combination of HD-DVD/Blu-Ray/whatever will be settled in other markets first.
I just still think such maneuvers would be crass and counter-productive for "we the consumer."
Since when would that matter? All the software needed to run the disks will come with the player; MS themselves don't have to do step one. While they may well integrate iHD better with Vista, that means dick-all to simply being able to "play the media." MS can go scratch in this case--it's all about them leveraging their OS to try to hurt Sony elsewhere so they can try to dominate that market (and by extension, the rest of the living room) as well. There is no "software issue."
Just look at your nearest MMORPG if you want proof. Every single real life female that I know who plays MMORPG's *always* selects the super-beautiful heroine girl.
;-)
We must hang out with different females in real life. Everyone I know who plays MMORPG's *always* selects a male avatar, as they either want to be "something different" or just simply to avoid being treated "like a chick" all the time due to those super-beautiful heroines.
The ones playing the female avatars are invariably us guys.
I think he's referring to their recent external DRM gaffes with CD's and all. Regardless, I've run across so many stupid protection schemes and questionable activities that if you're going to rebel against them on principle, then you're going to have to deal with 10% of the companies out there. That severly limits your entertainment choices and the ability to practice smart consumerism. ;)
At this point I take stand against companies that have exhibited highly questionable practices then don't back off community pressure and are instead bullheaded about it. Sony, at least, has backed off with pie on its face and is giving consumer refunds. There are worse examples out there.
Not really misleading, as the "goodness" of consoles really ARE their games. Until they become fully-fledged computers/entertainment centers/etc, and have lots of other purpose right out of the box, it's the gaming experience that sends you one direction or another and makes you decide to open your wallet.
I usually come to the consoles late anyway, but I've been shifting away from the PC a bit more so they're looking more enticing... However seeing that I still HAVE a PC, the 360's opening salvo isn't enticing enough. They'll have to come out with one or two things highly compelling to make me look their way before I see what Sony and Nintendo are bringing to the field.
It may not always start simple, but invariably they will come. I'm not sure what technical had to come to unify the + and - formats for DVD, but it became more and more common. Will HD-DVD/BR play be more complicated? Undoubtedly. But if all you have to do is come out with a more complex laser head and control chips...?
Like as not, unless the two sides are willing to meet formally--or one is so snowballed by the other that it caves by default--manufacturers will get us to the same situation we have now anyway. People don't really know much about their DVD players, but they get the job done well. (We may get someone sidelined to a small niche like DVD-RAM, but any major format is all wrapped together at this point.)
If Steve offers OS X to you for free, you take it.
...if for no other reason than to put it in a "$500 Desktop Project" that you profit off to FUND your "$100 Laptop Project..." ;-)
Yes!
Oh please.
Are you suggesting that Microsoft will turn down your money for a support call on a Windows XP BSOD because you have installed Firefox? I doubt it.
Actually, that was exactly his point. Remember the "you will pay through the nose for it" part? You're not too likely to get FREE support... not without a few "passing the buck" attempts. (HP and Dell ping-ponged me all night once over an AMAZINGLY SIMPLE MATTER. I wanted to firebomb them both. X_X )
Meanwhile, no one's talking about simple things where you're using one of a billion 3rd party pieces of software getting annulled... They're trying to think up situations at least reasonably analogous to the originating FUD and how it compares.
Recycled from an above thread, already talking on the matter:
m iles_archive.html#107570569615970184
...and to post the end of the article directly:
http://kenethmiles.blogspot.com/2004_02_01_keneth
The main points:
- People saying "OMG EPA BANZ DDT AT FAULT!" are being simplistic and unscientific
- DDT is not banned from public health use is most places where malaria is endemic
- DDT is kept from most outdoor use because widespread and indescriminate use actually makes the spread of malaria worse... by increasing the mosquito population's resistance to DDT
- other insecticides are much better alternatives to DDT outdoors
Most nations where malaria is a problem, and most health professionals working in the field of malaria control, support the targeted use of DDT, as part of the tool kit for malaria control. Most also agree that more cost-effective, less environmentally persistent alternatives are needed. There are some effective alternative chemicals for the control of adult mosquitoes, but preventing their further development is lack of invest ment by industry, because malaria is largely a disease of the poor.
Malaria is responsible for enormous suffering and death. The facts are readily available in the scientific literature. To blame a reduction in DDT usage for the death of 10-30 million people from malaria is not just simple-minded, it is demonstrably wrong. To blame a mythical, monolithic entity called the environmental lobby for the total reduction in DDT usage is not just paranoid, it is also demonstrably wrong.
Did you actually... um... read the letter? He goes on for paragraphs talking about how such comments are simple-minded bunk, that the DDT ban did not constitute an instantaneous ban in developing countries (who are still not averse to targetted use today), how widespread outdoor use was actually making the spread of malaria WORSE, how other chemicals are better-used for the purposes of malaria-control and other things they wanted to use DDT for...