No, it's really much more insightful than the comment he was responding to. Regardless of the physical gun he used, the point is that Libertarians have such a narrow view that their definition of force is ridiculous.
If you take that point, then the OEMs have NO freedom to add software to their machines, as that would be as much modification as a "Reboot into BeOS" icon would. That, of course, is ludicrous.
Ok, so the CPUs are lower MHz than the current ones, but I wasn't interested in searching that long, and they're both of the modern generation. Doesn't look so good now does it?
Wow, some of us are college students who don't have room/money for that, and some people like to watch DVDs on planes or other locations without TVs. What was your sarcastic point again?
Ok, I don't like musicals. This means I'm going to dislike a musical episode. Creative, sure, high point is kind of pushing it. More plot progression? There were 2 long-term plot points: Buffy leaks out she was in heaven, not hell, and winds up kissing Spike. The plot of the episode itself seems to be as follows: Dawn puts on pendant, summons lord of dance demon who wants to make her his queen. After tracking him down for a bit, Buffy shows up and defeats him. Not too deep.
I also haven't been a fan long, I borrowed a friend's collection and bought the first season DVD set, so this is not good old days syndrome. I just finished season 4 last weekend, and I'd call it the high point of the series at least for me, for quantifiable reasons I will explain over email if you wish to hear.
It was pretty bad. It wasn't bad enough to make me give it up, and the endind to it made me happy, but damn it got annoying at times. Season 4 was way better.
Fine, there's nothing inherently wrong with showing sports, but they should keep the length reasonable and not consistently run out of the time slot, then blame the show in that slot for poor ratings.
As a side note, the one disappoitning thing is that while the GF4Ti cards (NV25 chipset) include a second Vertex Shading Unit in teh chip, there is *NO* dedicated pixel shading unit at all, as there was in the GF3. Why is this??
Um, yes it does have a dedicated pixel shader. It still only has one, like the GF3, though it's faster. Where did you get the idea it doesn't?
The MX line isn't just "slower at benchmarks." It's actually severely castrated, and when the GF3 Ti200 drops in price with the release of the GF4, it will be a WAY better buy than a GF4MX. Any modern game will be unacceptable on a 4MX, but very nice on a Ti200. As for your car analogy, it's more like saying "Sure an RSX is pretty zippy, but if you want to run quarter miles a Camaro Z28 doesn't cost too much more and is MUCH better at it.
The GF4's special features are just the same ones as in the GF3, only faster, i.e. it will not require special programming on top of the GF3 code to be used. Also, while a lot of games don't really use the GF3, some do. (Max Payne, Aquanox, etc)
It had hoards and hoards of detail. No, it didn't have as much detail as the book. A movie can't; they're different media and have different strengths. All the characters looked exactly as they should have (ok, the hobbits were too thin, that's minor though), and all the scenery was gorgeous. The movie would have been much, much worse if they had tried to make it a perfect rendition of the book, it works much better this way.
An install of 2k from a manufacturer is worthless. Dell may be a "major manufacturer," but they still cut corners just like Compaq. When I installed 2k on a handbuilt machine with all high quality parts right down to the screws, it never crashed except when it was provably the fault of a program.
All this loud posturing that it's not proprietary makes me wonder: if they DO use industry-standard hardware, how can it be claimed that their hardware is so incredibly superior to the x86 stuff? It also fails to adress the point that for all the standards they use, they have no direct competition in their architecture, which, I would believe, has more to do with their higher prices than than their market share does.
My question is, since AOL uses unique screen names instead of ID numbers, how will they handle screen name overlaps between the instant messenger databases?
Sorry, my bad, it's not EXACTLY the KKK motto. Their flag bears the inscription "Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ad omnibus." Close enough to your.sig that I had forgotten the exact wording. Still, it could be suggestive, just to let you know.
For a reference, look here. It's not in English, but at the bottom you should be able to make it out.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it's really much more insightful than the comment he was responding to. Regardless of the physical gun he used, the point is that Libertarians have such a narrow view that their definition of force is ridiculous.
If you take that point, then the OEMs have NO freedom to add software to their machines, as that would be as much modification as a "Reboot into BeOS" icon would. That, of course, is ludicrous.
So you pick RC5, which is notorious for being happen on the G4. Wow, that's a valid general metric. Let's talk SPEC now:
SPECint SPECfp
Athlon 800 35.0 26.1
G4 450 21.4 20.4
Ok, so the CPUs are lower MHz than the current ones, but I wasn't interested in searching that long, and they're both of the modern generation. Doesn't look so good now does it?
Wow, some of us are college students who don't have room/money for that, and some people like to watch DVDs on planes or other locations without TVs. What was your sarcastic point again?
I also haven't been a fan long, I borrowed a friend's collection and bought the first season DVD set, so this is not good old days syndrome. I just finished season 4 last weekend, and I'd call it the high point of the series at least for me, for quantifiable reasons I will explain over email if you wish to hear.
It was pretty bad. It wasn't bad enough to make me give it up, and the endind to it made me happy, but damn it got annoying at times. Season 4 was way better.
Fine, there's nothing inherently wrong with showing sports, but they should keep the length reasonable and not consistently run out of the time slot, then blame the show in that slot for poor ratings.
Ok, I'm confused, did that have anything to do with what I said?
Um, yes it does have a dedicated pixel shader. It still only has one, like the GF3, though it's faster. Where did you get the idea it doesn't?
The MX line isn't just "slower at benchmarks." It's actually severely castrated, and when the GF3 Ti200 drops in price with the release of the GF4, it will be a WAY better buy than a GF4MX. Any modern game will be unacceptable on a 4MX, but very nice on a Ti200. As for your car analogy, it's more like saying "Sure an RSX is pretty zippy, but if you want to run quarter miles a Camaro Z28 doesn't cost too much more and is MUCH better at it.
The GF4's special features are just the same ones as in the GF3, only faster, i.e. it will not require special programming on top of the GF3 code to be used. Also, while a lot of games don't really use the GF3, some do. (Max Payne, Aquanox, etc)
Studio Display is a specific Apple product.
I think, by context, he meant "I hope they don't pull a Mitnick, and instead give him a fair chance." I'm not sure, but I think that was the intent.
I waste enough time keeping up with this stuff that I can make the parts lists in 5 minutes. :)
It had hoards and hoards of detail. No, it didn't have as much detail as the book. A movie can't; they're different media and have different strengths. All the characters looked exactly as they should have (ok, the hobbits were too thin, that's minor though), and all the scenery was gorgeous. The movie would have been much, much worse if they had tried to make it a perfect rendition of the book, it works much better this way.
An install of 2k from a manufacturer is worthless. Dell may be a "major manufacturer," but they still cut corners just like Compaq. When I installed 2k on a handbuilt machine with all high quality parts right down to the screws, it never crashed except when it was provably the fault of a program.
Damn, a reasonable Mac geek, you're the first I met.
He's showing how ridiculous the obvious counter to that argument is...
If you read the article, you'd know the Duron is WAY faster than a 1.3 gig Celeron would be...
I'd appreciate that translation too, though since I'm a German student I'd also like the original :), and where can I buy the Pabst fan?
Thanks.
All this loud posturing that it's not proprietary makes me wonder: if they DO use industry-standard hardware, how can it be claimed that their hardware is so incredibly superior to the x86 stuff? It also fails to adress the point that for all the standards they use, they have no direct competition in their architecture, which, I would believe, has more to do with their higher prices than than their market share does.
Just as a point, the ghosting you refer to in UT is part of the engine itself; it happens on a CRT too.
My question is, since AOL uses unique screen names instead of ID numbers, how will they handle screen name overlaps between the instant messenger databases?
Um, you do realize Texas Instruments wouldn't have a Japanese name, right?
For a reference, look here. It's not in English, but at the bottom you should be able to make it out.