An anonymous coward on Slashdot says ReadyBoost won't work! He must be right, he was so certain that he used wild speculation to prove his point!
That'll teach Microsoft for spending all that money and time on research before implementing a feature, all they needed to do was post an Ask Slashdot.
> I also have to leave mine at home when I go to parents evening just in case I might possibly take a picture of a school pupil. what?
When parents can't take photos at school events, it may not be the terrorists, but someone has certainly won.... I know that my daughter's school has no problems with parents with cameras, whether they be phone cameras, handicams, or SLRs. Have things really sunk that far elsewhere?
there's an entire class of fallacies dedicated to the flaws in your post.
Person A is a Developer using Linux. Person A can use OpenOffice. it does not follow that you must be a linux using developer to be able to use OpenOffice.
Incidentally, to add one more anecdote to the pile - I'm right this minute using MS Word 2003 to look at a document created by someone else using MS Word. For them it looks fine, for me, it's horribly wrong - in OpenOffice it also looks horribly wrong, but equally as horribly wrong as Word 2003, but once I've managed to correct the wrongness (people that use a word processor as a page layout tool need to be stabbed repeatedly until they stop it), I'll at least be able to export it to PDF from OpenOffice writer.
If you can't figure out that by "OSX 2001" he meant "The version of Mac OS X released in 2001" from the context of the conversation, then you have some serious comprehension issues to address.
It's nice that you can show us all how you know that there's no such thing as OSX 2001, it'd be nicer if you showed us you were at least marginally intelligent - or at least less likely make a poor attempt at sarcasm every time someone abbreviates something.
I work from home two days a week, or more if I feel like it, and there's just nowhere further I can go without leaving development behind and going to management, which is not something I'm even remotely interested in.
In my case, even when I'm in the office I'm telecommuting - I work for our national R&D department in another city, so the local office is just as remote to my boss and co-workers as my desk at home.
The only difference is I usually get better network connectivity from home;)
I'd assume it'd be backwards compatible, similar to the AGP standards - in most cases you could stick any AGP card in an AGP 8x slot (as long as the motherboard still supported the voltages used by the older AGP versions, which was true in most cases).
If that's the case, then there's no barrier to adoption and manufacturers can just start cranking them out as soon as they're ready. It's only when a technology requires a completely new platform at multiple levels that adoptions is slow, and that was why PCIe took so long.
When the company is preparing bids, they use historical data along with any planned development costs to improve efficiency. Doesn't sound like any company I know.... They usually either assume that development time will be 0, pull a number from their arse, or ask a developer, listen attentively while the developer gives them a reasonable quote and then pull a number from their arse.
I don't care if it meets the 3G definition or not, but if it can do the 200kbps that EDGE is supposed to be capable of, then that's good enough for me.
It's interesting that he compared it to the horrible keyboard smartphones though - why not to something like an O2 Jam or a Motorola A1000? 90% of the non iPod features he was bragging about exist on my A1000. The difference is, on the A1000 they suck, because it's a poorly thought out underpowered piece of crap designed specifically for 3 that doesn't even integrate properly with 3's service. When I saw the presentation, I thought, "that's the A1000, done _right_"
Lack of third party apps is a big turn off though. I _want_ to be able to load crappy buggy third party apps on my phone. I want to _write_ crappy buggy third party apps for my phone.
I'd agree with the rest of your post, except I have actually been to WA, unfortunately. Although I can't be certain they didn't put me to sleep in the airport for two weeks and fiddle with my memory;)
It'd be far less of a problem in the outback than it is in a city like Canberra.
In the outback, the kangaroos have no reason to come to the road. But near a city, they come in to the city when water and food gets scarce - that's when they're a problem. Kangaroo road kill is a pretty common sight here (Canberra) - and I've personally had a couple of near misses.
I am well aware of what computer hardware is made from, and I never claimed it was impossible to write applications using nothing but boolean logic.
If you feel you have to write a program using nothing but logic gates to prove a statement I never made wrong, go right ahead. But as I said in my original comment, the rest of us will use high level languages.
BTW, if and while in themselves are not "boolean logic", they are jumps that rely on a boolean condition. Boolean logic has no concept of jumps, because it is not a programming language, it is a form of maths.
No, no, no! You should NEVER* pipe a cat! Why, will the world end? Will god kill a kitten?
How on earth did a tip like "you know, you could save yourself a few keystrokes and a process by not using cat", turn into a desperate plea to end one's wicked ways before it brings on the apocalypse?
If the most inefficient thing someone does in a day is a useless use of cat, then they've had a pretty productive day.
The whole point of RISC is that there is no translation - that makes the chips simpler and therefore easier to produce, so easier to make run fast, or easier to throw more chips or cores at a job.
If there's a translation then it's CISC, no translation - RISC At least that was the original idea, I don't think there's any true RISC chips out there any more....
The biggest problem with English is not that it doesn't follow its own rules - because it tries to, it really does. It's that there's been centuries worth of language snobs who refuse to believe that English is English and try to shoehorn Latin and Greek rules on to it.
There's no reason why we should try to use Greek or Latin pluralisation rules on loanwords from those languages, and ordinary people that don't know those languages (quite justifiably) use the rules they're familiar with to adapt them. But then some ivory tower academic snob with a classical education tells them they're wrong, and for some weird reason people believe the snob, rather than 500 years of common usage. Or maybe it's because the snobs write the style guides and the dictionaries, not ordinary people.
That's how you have travesties like the bogus "no split infinitive" rule. (Though fortunately people have seen the light on that one recently)
Slashdot Mirror
It's a convenient single click away.
Do you want someone from Slashdot to come round to your house and read it for you too?
Oh no!
Quick, someone call Microsoft, they've got to recall Vista!
An anonymous coward on Slashdot says ReadyBoost won't work!
He must be right, he was so certain that he used wild speculation to prove his point!
That'll teach Microsoft for spending all that money and time on research before implementing a feature, all they needed to do was post an Ask Slashdot.
people can have whatever delusions they like, just as long as they don't try to push them through something as unrelated as music software...
Gah.
Why do I get a sudden urge to download it and write some death metal with satanic themes after seeing that page?
> I also have to leave mine at home when I go to parents evening just in case I might possibly take a picture of a school pupil.
what?
When parents can't take photos at school events, it may not be the terrorists, but someone has certainly won....
I know that my daughter's school has no problems with parents with cameras, whether they be phone cameras, handicams, or SLRs. Have things really sunk that far elsewhere?
there's an entire class of fallacies dedicated to the flaws in your post.
Person A is a Developer using Linux.
Person A can use OpenOffice.
it does not follow that you must be a linux using developer to be able to use OpenOffice.
Incidentally, to add one more anecdote to the pile - I'm right this minute using MS Word 2003 to look at a document created by someone else using MS Word. For them it looks fine, for me, it's horribly wrong - in OpenOffice it also looks horribly wrong, but equally as horribly wrong as Word 2003, but once I've managed to correct the wrongness (people that use a word processor as a page layout tool need to be stabbed repeatedly until they stop it), I'll at least be able to export it to PDF from OpenOffice writer.
If you can't figure out that by "OSX 2001" he meant "The version of Mac OS X released in 2001" from the context of the conversation, then you have some serious comprehension issues to address.
It's nice that you can show us all how you know that there's no such thing as OSX 2001, it'd be nicer if you showed us you were at least marginally intelligent - or at least less likely make a poor attempt at sarcasm every time someone abbreviates something.
by "listen intently to" I of course meant "stare blankly at"
That's right.
;)
I work from home two days a week, or more if I feel like it, and there's just nowhere further I can go without leaving development behind and going to management, which is not something I'm even remotely interested in.
In my case, even when I'm in the office I'm telecommuting - I work for our national R&D department in another city, so the local office is just as remote to my boss and co-workers as my desk at home.
The only difference is I usually get better network connectivity from home
And that from someone unwilling to put their name to their post.
I'd assume it'd be backwards compatible, similar to the AGP standards - in most cases you could stick any AGP card in an AGP 8x slot (as long as the motherboard still supported the voltages used by the older AGP versions, which was true in most cases).
If that's the case, then there's no barrier to adoption and manufacturers can just start cranking them out as soon as they're ready. It's only when a technology requires a completely new platform at multiple levels that adoptions is slow, and that was why PCIe took so long.
They usually either assume that development time will be 0, pull a number from their arse, or ask a developer, listen attentively while the developer gives them a reasonable quote and then pull a number from their arse.
I don't care if it meets the 3G definition or not, but if it can do the 200kbps that EDGE is supposed to be capable of, then that's good enough for me.
It's interesting that he compared it to the horrible keyboard smartphones though - why not to something like an O2 Jam or a Motorola A1000? 90% of the non iPod features he was bragging about exist on my A1000. The difference is, on the A1000 they suck, because it's a poorly thought out underpowered piece of crap designed specifically for 3 that doesn't even integrate properly with 3's service. When I saw the presentation, I thought, "that's the A1000, done _right_"
Lack of third party apps is a big turn off though. I _want_ to be able to load crappy buggy third party apps on my phone. I want to _write_ crappy buggy third party apps for my phone.
Trick question.
None of the above, use bind variables instead.
um, there's black swans everywhere in Australia.
;)
I'd agree with the rest of your post, except I have actually been to WA, unfortunately. Although I can't be certain they didn't put me to sleep in the airport for two weeks and fiddle with my memory
It'd be far less of a problem in the outback than it is in a city like Canberra.
In the outback, the kangaroos have no reason to come to the road.
But near a city, they come in to the city when water and food gets scarce - that's when they're a problem.
Kangaroo road kill is a pretty common sight here (Canberra) - and I've personally had a couple of near misses.
I am well aware of what computer hardware is made from, and I never claimed it was impossible to write applications using nothing but boolean logic.
If you feel you have to write a program using nothing but logic gates to prove a statement I never made wrong, go right ahead.
But as I said in my original comment, the rest of us will use high level languages.
BTW, if and while in themselves are not "boolean logic", they are jumps that rely on a boolean condition.
Boolean logic has no concept of jumps, because it is not a programming language, it is a form of maths.
Good luck writing a major application using nothing but Boolean logic.
The rest of us use programming languages - and those languages have a syntax, and that syntax can certainly be affected by cultural factors.
How on earth did a tip like "you know, you could save yourself a few keystrokes and a process by not using cat", turn into a desperate plea to end one's wicked ways before it brings on the apocalypse?
If the most inefficient thing someone does in a day is a useless use of cat, then they've had a pretty productive day.
The whole point of RISC is that there is no translation - that makes the chips simpler and therefore easier to produce, so easier to make run fast, or easier to throw more chips or cores at a job.
If there's a translation then it's CISC, no translation - RISC
At least that was the original idea, I don't think there's any true RISC chips out there any more....
Even not counting the fact that no one counts like that any more (no, not even in England), I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
$0.074 trillion is a lot compared with $3.50 but it's not much compared to $1.576 trillion (4.7% in fact), no matter how you define trillion.
Besides, it doesn't matter if the number is "a little" more than Russia's GDP, or a lot more than it, it's still an utterly ridiculous number.
The biggest problem with English is not that it doesn't follow its own rules - because it tries to, it really does.
It's that there's been centuries worth of language snobs who refuse to believe that English is English and try to shoehorn Latin and Greek rules on to it.
There's no reason why we should try to use Greek or Latin pluralisation rules on loanwords from those languages, and ordinary people that don't know those languages (quite justifiably) use the rules they're familiar with to adapt them.
But then some ivory tower academic snob with a classical education tells them they're wrong, and for some weird reason people believe the snob, rather than 500 years of common usage. Or maybe it's because the snobs write the style guides and the dictionaries, not ordinary people.
That's how you have travesties like the bogus "no split infinitive" rule. (Though fortunately people have seen the light on that one recently)
No, you're making stuff up.
Show some evidence if you're not.
oops, if anyone needs a spare apostrophe, there's one in that last comment.