Its not as if Microsoft has a choice in this matter.
At the very least they could label songs that are restricted. At the very least. The fact that they don't label them as such, and now people can't share the songs as advertised is pretty bad. Of course, the record companies are just plain brain-dead to think they should restrict free advertisements of their music. From what I understand, the whole sharing process is designed to encourage users to buy the songs they borrow, once their limited-use period runs out.
Wow, sounds like the pot and the kettle. All the GP poster did to support the PS2 was to explain the reason why it did so well (and it did... actually it still does, you can't dispute that). He mentioned impressive graphics, but didn't say they were better than XBox, just that they were impressive, and that graphics were just one factor out of several that came together at the right time for Sony in the previous round.
He's also not saying that the XBox 360 sucks, or even that the PS3 is better (so calm down a little already), or that the PS3 will "win" in the long run. He just said that the XBox 360 isn't currently in enough homes to pull the whole world over to Microsoft-based entertainment systems, because the factors of the console war are different this time around. Pay a little more attention to the context in which he was writing, and read his whole comment before flying off the handle to defend the XBox's graphics.
Bytheway, the only console I currently own is an N64, so I'm not really for or against either Sony or Microsoft, although I do believe that both of them make some weird decisions and bad assumptions regarding how they approach the market.
Considering the fact that it won't be until July 2008 before Microsoft gets games into the Zune, I'd say they're a little backlogged on iPod catch-up features. I'm seriously wondering what happened in the middle of your post, though, because it made lots of sense (or sounded like it, except it took me about 30 seconds to figure out what "visula voice messaging" was supposed to be), until about halfway through point 2.
Sure the phone has sensors (lots of devices do), but I'm sure it will never, ever be intended for them to be used in the way you described. Maybe there will be some kind of hack project to make the iPhone usable as a very basic interface for something, but the basic sensors it has are limited, I'm sure to being useful for their intended design purposes. The Wiimote was designed over a period of years to be used as a controller for the Wii. It's functionality won't be duplicated by a hacked iPhone. And I don't think Microsoft wants to make a controller/phone/Zune that costs as much as its competitors more expensive games console, to attract people to the XBox360. The last thing you want to do is throw your $500 controller for the $400 console at your $2000 plasma. Not to mention the fact that the Wii controller concept works because the Wii was designed around it. Unless Microsoft wants to build a Wii-style console, Wii-style controllers will never sell for it. Look up "Power Glove" and "U-Force" on wikipedia.
Has anybody actually bought a CD that they could not rip?
I've never seen one that I couldn't easily rip songs from....
I had a Foo Fighters CD that I got as a gift which was labeled as an "enhanced" CD. The first time I put it in my PC at home, I forgot to hold down the shift key, and I wasn't able to rip it on that computer (although the software on the CD wanted to "give" me a set of protected files for all of the songs, which I would only be able to listen to with their proprietary player). I ripped the CD under Linux on my laptop, then again on my work PC in Windows. Also with this CD, it was supposed to have some kind of bonus content that would connect to 'somebody' over the Internet to authenticate the CD in order to unlock the bonus content. That never worked on any PC I tried it on, the authentication always failed.
So there were two disappointments on that disc: 1) If you don't hold down the shift key, you won't be able to rip it (under Windows) and 2) the broken bonus content. I like the music on the CD, though... it's too bad that they have to muck it all up with DRM under the guise of extra features that don't work.
I agree that the transcoding is important and would require some serious CPU power. I just don't understand why it requires the Viiv or the AMD Live! brands. If I have a top-of-the-line Core2Duo system with several GB of RAM, why can't the Media Center software handle the transcoding? Do the Viiv and Live! branded systems include special hardware transcoders? (I wouldn't think so, because then how would they deal with all the different codecs out there?) If they have their own special software, then why wouldn't the purchase of a $1000 Core 2 Extreme processor qualify me to get that software?
I'm sure there are MCE PC's out there that wouldn't meet the specs for the transcoding functionality, but if Vista can downgrade my Aero UI because my graphics card sucks, why can't Media Center remove my transcoding functionality if my CPU sucks? Why are Viiv and Live! special?Why can't we just have the functionality without the otherwise uselessness of having AMD's or Intel's latest marketing gimmick get a new stamp on the box?
referenced the fact that the camcorder was being mixed up with a Media Center/MythTV/Tivo type of DVR for recording tv shows. Of course a camcorder is useful as a camcorder, but a camcorder as a camcorder is not useful or efficient or economical in a PVR solution. Of course you can use it as a PVR and as a camcorder, but if you're going to use it while you're on vacation or while you're at your cousin's wedding or wherever else, you can't use it as a PVR back at home at the same time to record the episodes of Mythbusters that you're missing because of the vacation/wedding/whatever. And by the way, the Media PC/Tivo/Mythbox doesn't get turned off. It's supposed to be an appliance mixed with a PC, ready to record at whatever time in the night your favorite episode of whatever show happens to be on.
The point of spending a bunch of money on a Media PC is that it will be able to handle your media no matter where you are or what you're doing. You made a fine point that the camcorder can be used to capture video. But it doesn't really fit into the topic of the Media PC very well. Sorry that hurt your feelings. I'll try to be more sensitive for you in the future.;)
Kramer: Why, I've plugged in cables so small I couldn't even see them! Elaine: How did you know you plugged them in? Kramer:... Well... I guess I just assumed...!
I think lots of media server programs do transcoding on the fly to minimize network and client CPU requirements.
I know that's supposed to be one of the big advantages of have an Intel Viiv PC... It's supposed to let you transcode and stream any video format to your XBox/Media Center Extender, instead of being limited to.wmv files. But I don't understand why this has to be tied to a specific brand like Intel Viiv or AMD Live!... Why can't the Media Center software handle it?
Media Center PCs have almost always been spec'd out as higher-end systems anyway... It really seems to me that Microsoft and Intel are making up artifical reasons to sell us new hardware (I know, welcome to marketing, but still...), instead of getting better use out of what we already have. What was the quote Jack Handy gave us? "In think instead of building bigger and newer Weapons of Mass Destruction, we should be finding ways to get more use out of the ones we already have." [Paraphrased and updated for the 21st century]
Not only can you do that with any camcorder with a video input, but if that camcorder is a MiniDV camera with video input and the ability to act as a bridge - which even some $500 MiniDV camcorders will do - you can use it to stream DV to your PC for recording.
Yeah, because paying $500 for a camcorder as a video capture device for your PVR is so much more economical than a $60 Hauppage card...
Here's my post above... I think that spells out the basics... but for a quick summary:
ISPs want to be able to provide content and services (video, Voice over IP, etc.), but due to their lack of experience in those fields, they want to handicap the companies that have worked for years to do a good job of providing their own services, and make those established companies pay more money to get their content to your house with the same priority as the content from the ISP (or to get there at all). As an example, it's been said that in some regions where Comcast offered VoIP service, they were choking off Vonage VoIP packets to their customers, making their own service artificially "better".
Without Net Neutrality, the service you get at your house depends entirely on which providers pony up to your ISP, or possibly, which providers your ISP doesn't like. Remember who Time's Person of the year was for 2006? Well with non-neutrality, the bloggers, youtubers, and any other independent voices lose out to the people who pay or get paid by the telecoms. The telecoms make it sound like the other content providers are just freeloaders, getting rich off the Internet without paying for their traffic, but it's really just the telecoms wanting to pocket more money, just because someone other than them came up with a useful idea for the Internet.
It's funny, but it seems like they're kind of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs... If the ISPs become the only content providers, and their content will suck, what motivation is there to use the Internet anymore? I'm sure traffic and subscribers will go down once people realize they can't get the services they were paying $40 + a month to get. Once online gaming, VoIP, the almost-fledgling movie download market, myspace, youtube, and all the other useful features of the Internet get screwed over, who wants to use the Internet anymore?
Net Neutrality means that carriers cannot discriminate based upon the type of traffic you're sending. HTTP traffic and SSH traffic would be treated equally. Whether that's a good thing is for you to decide.
As twbecker mentions in his reply to your post, I think you don't exactly have it straight, either, so I just want to clarify a little more on what he said. It's not about the type of traffic (although that's the type of argument they give), it's about discriminating based on who provides the content. If there was a way to prioritize VoIP in general, without giving preferential treatment to Comcast over Vonage, that wouldn't be as bad (although I'm not sure I trust anyone out there -- ISPs, the government, or content providers -- to decide what types of traffic are more important than others), but the real potential problem is that Comcast can screw with the Vonage traffic so that the service basically doesn't work anymore... All of a sudden, it looks like Comcast's VoIP is the only service that "works" in your area, so that's what you're stuck with (no matter how good or bad the service might be).
The problem is that the ISP's want to provide content now, and they are wanting to extort money out of all of the companies who have actually worked for years to build their content services, just to stay on equal footing with the ISP's. It's funny how one of the arguments of the ISP's against neutrality is "There's no evidence that we would mess with your traffic, so you shouldn't make it illegal to mess with it", but at the same time, they're speaking out against Google and others, saying that those content providers are getting a "free ride" on their Inter-tubes (never mind the fact that the content providers are already paying their own Internet service bills, and their customers are paying their own bills, so nobody is actually getting a free ride).
Websites like Hands off the Internet are really frustrating, because it's such a twisted, astroturfing, messed up view, accusing the people who want a level playing field of trying to get money from the average joe. When actually, it's been the telecoms screwing over average joe with all of the extra charges we were paying for years that were supposed to have brought us all great broadband service years ago.
When was the last time a new version of Microsoft Windows came out with a faster user interface?
Huh? I've never seen the Windows UI being "slow"? I don't really know what you mean...
You saying there's a difference in e.g. Windows XP compared to Windows 95?
Are you really talking about the Windows USER32 and other such subsystems or rather simple application requirements?
On my P4 2.6 GHz laptop, Vista (RC1) runs like a pig, while KDE, Gnome, and Windows XP are all fine. Vista RC1 is much better than Beta 2 was, but it still crawls. And Vista can't even run the Aero Glass effects, whereas the same hardware has no problem with Beryl/XGL in Gnome.
The GP has a point. From what I understand the Mac OS X releases get faster with each release, Gnome had a release recently that improved performance, and KDE is going to do the same thing with their next major release. That's one advantage to having more frequent release schedules... When you only release every 5 years, you put so much effort into big huge features to try to wow everyone, those features take more resources, and there's no room for performance improvements. All of the other Desktop Environments are all working constantly on making things better for the hardware that's out there right now... I'd like to see the release build of Vista running on hardware that was available when Vista/Longhorn was announced. It wouldn't do so well.
> George Lucas has announced that the script for the long-rumored fourth Indiana Jones film has been finalized
Finalized? Heh heh. Every Fanboy knows George doesn't write the script until he does the editing.
No, no. He edits it without writing, then does the first theatrical release, then he writes it for the second theatrical release. Then there's more writing for the third theatrical release, and of course it goes without saying that each of the 5 or 6 VHS/DVD editions is rewritten. I'm still waiting for Star Wars Episodes 2 & 3 where Yoda doesn't fight at all. I can't wait to see those movies get worse. Although maybe the midi-colorians (sp?) will get written out entirely for the 20-year special edition theatrical re-release of the prequels.
Speaking of prequels, that's one thing we have to hope and pray about... with Harrison Ford being 20+ years old, please, please don't make this a prequel... everyone else is doing prequels.
For the Linux desktop, 2002 was an important year. Since then, we have continuously been fed point releases which added bits of functionality and speed improvements, but no major revision has yet seen the light of day.
Some people consider Windows XP to be a point release of 2000. But even if XP was a major release, they still went from 2001 until Jan 2007 before making a new release (to consumers, anyhow). Sounds like KDE has until 2008 to make a new release before they're any worse than MS, if you're going strictly by "major" releases.
But even just looking at the point releases... KDE got tons better in 3.2, then again in 3.3 then in 3.4, and now 3.5... It really compares more against OSX's almost yearly "point" releases, which have all had quite a few improvements in functionality and style. Personally, after playing around with KDE for a while and enjoying it's earlier support for compositing, I went back to Gnome, and thoroughly enjoy using it (and now with Beryl/Xgl, the transparency in KDE isn't an exclusive feature in the Linux world anymore). I like Gnome, so I'm not really looking for any major changes to it... I don't want changes to get in the way of how I like to use it. It helps me use and enjoy my computer.
I do have one of the Vista RC's in a dual-boot setup on my laptop, but I only use it for work, where the software is Windows-only. I don't care for Vista. I have a hard time understanding why Vista can't pull off cool effects on the same hardware that Beryl/Xgl work so well on. But even if it could, MS is trying so hard to make an appealing product, when Gnome/KDE/Apple just plain make great products. MS wants to let us all know how hard they're trying to be cool, but in the end, they're just trying. Sure, Microsoft has a new major release coming out right now, but it has actually complicated the experience of using my computer, making me that much happier with Gnome.
That's because he's asking about non-"n00b" questions... With Linux, you're expected to have to ask around on forums a read lots of man pages to learn how to do the kinds of tasks that Linux people do. He wants to know how to do the same types of things in OS X, but he's expecting those things to come as easily as the normal every day user tasks in OS X. Just because it's made by Apple doesn't mean messing with the "under-the-hood" things is easier than it is with Linux. You still have to do some work and research to understand the internals.
KnoppMyth will run a frontend system as a LiveCD. Obviously, for the backend part, it would have to be installed, but KnoppMyth does have LiveCD functionality.
Lumus glasses can accept video inputs via an undisclosed connection
Undisclosed? What, does the input jack require lube or something?
"...So you see, the electrical impulses are carried along the central nervous system then back out through the epidural layer near the magnet on the glasses... "
"Look, I don't care how it works that is Not an entrance!"
Of course, that input requires a special implantation surgery... From Hot Shots: "It's called a multipupiloptomy, but in order to keep from damaging the eye sockets they have to go in through the rectum... Ain't no man gonna take that route with me!"
Wow, I always thought the Bon Target was just a family joke. I haven't lived by a Bon Marché for about 10 years now, so noone around me ever understands the Bon Target joke, but now the Bon Marché in my parents' hometown as well as my local Meier & Frank store are all Macy's stores now, so I guess the joke is truly dead. If only Beowulf cluster jokes on slashdot would die (and Netcraft could confirm it).
the reviews of the PS3's BluRay features and playback are absolutely gushing and calling it the best player on the market
If I'm not mistaken, the PS3 is only the 2nd Blu-Ray player on the market... There's the Samsung player, which has been out for a little while now, the PS3, and the Sony one won't be released until just before Christmas, I believe. Pioneer and Philips should have players... eventually... but for now they're getting screwed over by the already short supply of blue lasers going to the PS3. I'm sure the main reason the Sony BD player has been delayed so much is also because of the blue laser shortage.
But then I'd be surprised if a $500/$600 dollar game machine can be a better BD player than a dedicated $1000 machine, too... I'm sure the PS3 will have its share of BD problems.
Nintendo has always innovated with their controllers. You're only listing the ones that were failures. Oh, and they didn't make the Power Glove, that was a third-party accessory.
My point was precisely that the original controller is what matters in a console, that's what developers will design for. It's the add-ons that haven't done well, with very limited games designed for them. Of course I'm counting the Wiimote as the original controller, the GGP said above that Sony or MS could just copy the Wiimote and make it as an add-on for their systems. My point was that as an add-on it doesn't make sense or rise above the gimmick level, and it wouldn't have games developed for it. As the original controller for the system (and the heart of the Wii philosophy), it will spur a lot of new thinking about how game controls are designed. Lots of developers will design games for it because it is the primary interface for the whole console.
The actual Nintendo controllers have always set the standard in the industry since the NES. As you described, every generation of Nintendo consoles has had some great new features in the controller, which are then copied by the next generation of the other consoles. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the stock controllers on the new consoles 5 years from now will have built-in speakers, non-volatile memory for holding players' avatars, and motion sensing functionality (OK, Sony already stepped into that one with the sixaxis).
Slashdot Mirror
Its not as if Microsoft has a choice in this matter.
At the very least they could label songs that are restricted. At the very least. The fact that they don't label them as such, and now people can't share the songs as advertised is pretty bad. Of course, the record companies are just plain brain-dead to think they should restrict free advertisements of their music. From what I understand, the whole sharing process is designed to encourage users to buy the songs they borrow, once their limited-use period runs out.
Morons. All of them.
Hopefully he's not the guy that had the idea to make the voice prompt say:
"For security purposes, please say your account number...."
"For security purposes, please say your PIN..."
Whoever came up with that little "security" gem deserves to spend 8 hours a day for the rest of his life navigating phone menus.
Wow, sounds like the pot and the kettle. All the GP poster did to support the PS2 was to explain the reason why it did so well (and it did... actually it still does, you can't dispute that). He mentioned impressive graphics, but didn't say they were better than XBox, just that they were impressive, and that graphics were just one factor out of several that came together at the right time for Sony in the previous round.
He's also not saying that the XBox 360 sucks, or even that the PS3 is better (so calm down a little already), or that the PS3 will "win" in the long run. He just said that the XBox 360 isn't currently in enough homes to pull the whole world over to Microsoft-based entertainment systems, because the factors of the console war are different this time around. Pay a little more attention to the context in which he was writing, and read his whole comment before flying off the handle to defend the XBox's graphics.
Bytheway, the only console I currently own is an N64, so I'm not really for or against either Sony or Microsoft, although I do believe that both of them make some weird decisions and bad assumptions regarding how they approach the market.
Considering the fact that it won't be until July 2008 before Microsoft gets games into the Zune, I'd say they're a little backlogged on iPod catch-up features. I'm seriously wondering what happened in the middle of your post, though, because it made lots of sense (or sounded like it, except it took me about 30 seconds to figure out what "visula voice messaging" was supposed to be), until about halfway through point 2.
Sure the phone has sensors (lots of devices do), but I'm sure it will never, ever be intended for them to be used in the way you described. Maybe there will be some kind of hack project to make the iPhone usable as a very basic interface for something, but the basic sensors it has are limited, I'm sure to being useful for their intended design purposes. The Wiimote was designed over a period of years to be used as a controller for the Wii. It's functionality won't be duplicated by a hacked iPhone. And I don't think Microsoft wants to make a controller/phone/Zune that costs as much as its competitors more expensive games console, to attract people to the XBox360. The last thing you want to do is throw your $500 controller for the $400 console at your $2000 plasma. Not to mention the fact that the Wii controller concept works because the Wii was designed around it. Unless Microsoft wants to build a Wii-style console, Wii-style controllers will never sell for it. Look up "Power Glove" and "U-Force" on wikipedia.
Has anybody actually bought a CD that they could not rip?
I've never seen one that I couldn't easily rip songs from....
I had a Foo Fighters CD that I got as a gift which was labeled as an "enhanced" CD. The first time I put it in my PC at home, I forgot to hold down the shift key, and I wasn't able to rip it on that computer (although the software on the CD wanted to "give" me a set of protected files for all of the songs, which I would only be able to listen to with their proprietary player). I ripped the CD under Linux on my laptop, then again on my work PC in Windows. Also with this CD, it was supposed to have some kind of bonus content that would connect to 'somebody' over the Internet to authenticate the CD in order to unlock the bonus content. That never worked on any PC I tried it on, the authentication always failed.
So there were two disappointments on that disc: 1) If you don't hold down the shift key, you won't be able to rip it (under Windows) and 2) the broken bonus content. I like the music on the CD, though... it's too bad that they have to muck it all up with DRM under the guise of extra features that don't work.
I agree that the transcoding is important and would require some serious CPU power. I just don't understand why it requires the Viiv or the AMD Live! brands. If I have a top-of-the-line Core2Duo system with several GB of RAM, why can't the Media Center software handle the transcoding? Do the Viiv and Live! branded systems include special hardware transcoders? (I wouldn't think so, because then how would they deal with all the different codecs out there?) If they have their own special software, then why wouldn't the purchase of a $1000 Core 2 Extreme processor qualify me to get that software?
I'm sure there are MCE PC's out there that wouldn't meet the specs for the transcoding functionality, but if Vista can downgrade my Aero UI because my graphics card sucks, why can't Media Center remove my transcoding functionality if my CPU sucks? Why are Viiv and Live! special?Why can't we just have the functionality without the otherwise uselessness of having AMD's or Intel's latest marketing gimmick get a new stamp on the box?
The point of spending a bunch of money on a Media PC is that it will be able to handle your media no matter where you are or what you're doing. You made a fine point that the camcorder can be used to capture video. But it doesn't really fit into the topic of the Media PC very well. Sorry that hurt your feelings. I'll try to be more sensitive for you in the future.
Kramer: Why, I've plugged in cables so small I couldn't even see them! ... Well... I guess I just assumed...!
Elaine: How did you know you plugged them in?
Kramer:
I think lots of media server programs do transcoding on the fly to minimize network and client CPU requirements.
.wmv files. But I don't understand why this has to be tied to a specific brand like Intel Viiv or AMD Live!... Why can't the Media Center software handle it?
I know that's supposed to be one of the big advantages of have an Intel Viiv PC... It's supposed to let you transcode and stream any video format to your XBox/Media Center Extender, instead of being limited to
Media Center PCs have almost always been spec'd out as higher-end systems anyway... It really seems to me that Microsoft and Intel are making up artifical reasons to sell us new hardware (I know, welcome to marketing, but still...), instead of getting better use out of what we already have. What was the quote Jack Handy gave us? "In think instead of building bigger and newer Weapons of Mass Destruction, we should be finding ways to get more use out of the ones we already have." [Paraphrased and updated for the 21st century]
Here's my post above... I think that spells out the basics... but for a quick summary:
ISPs want to be able to provide content and services (video, Voice over IP, etc.), but due to their lack of experience in those fields, they want to handicap the companies that have worked for years to do a good job of providing their own services, and make those established companies pay more money to get their content to your house with the same priority as the content from the ISP (or to get there at all). As an example, it's been said that in some regions where Comcast offered VoIP service, they were choking off Vonage VoIP packets to their customers, making their own service artificially "better".
Without Net Neutrality, the service you get at your house depends entirely on which providers pony up to your ISP, or possibly, which providers your ISP doesn't like. Remember who Time's Person of the year was for 2006? Well with non-neutrality, the bloggers, youtubers, and any other independent voices lose out to the people who pay or get paid by the telecoms. The telecoms make it sound like the other content providers are just freeloaders, getting rich off the Internet without paying for their traffic, but it's really just the telecoms wanting to pocket more money, just because someone other than them came up with a useful idea for the Internet.
It's funny, but it seems like they're kind of killing the goose that lays the golden eggs... If the ISPs become the only content providers, and their content will suck, what motivation is there to use the Internet anymore? I'm sure traffic and subscribers will go down once people realize they can't get the services they were paying $40 + a month to get. Once online gaming, VoIP, the almost-fledgling movie download market, myspace, youtube, and all the other useful features of the Internet get screwed over, who wants to use the Internet anymore?
Net Neutrality means that carriers cannot discriminate based upon the type of traffic you're sending. HTTP traffic and SSH traffic would be treated equally. Whether that's a good thing is for you to decide.
As twbecker mentions in his reply to your post, I think you don't exactly have it straight, either, so I just want to clarify a little more on what he said. It's not about the type of traffic (although that's the type of argument they give), it's about discriminating based on who provides the content. If there was a way to prioritize VoIP in general, without giving preferential treatment to Comcast over Vonage, that wouldn't be as bad (although I'm not sure I trust anyone out there -- ISPs, the government, or content providers -- to decide what types of traffic are more important than others), but the real potential problem is that Comcast can screw with the Vonage traffic so that the service basically doesn't work anymore... All of a sudden, it looks like Comcast's VoIP is the only service that "works" in your area, so that's what you're stuck with (no matter how good or bad the service might be).
The problem is that the ISP's want to provide content now, and they are wanting to extort money out of all of the companies who have actually worked for years to build their content services, just to stay on equal footing with the ISP's. It's funny how one of the arguments of the ISP's against neutrality is "There's no evidence that we would mess with your traffic, so you shouldn't make it illegal to mess with it", but at the same time, they're speaking out against Google and others, saying that those content providers are getting a "free ride" on their Inter-tubes (never mind the fact that the content providers are already paying their own Internet service bills, and their customers are paying their own bills, so nobody is actually getting a free ride). Websites like Hands off the Internet are really frustrating, because it's such a twisted, astroturfing, messed up view, accusing the people who want a level playing field of trying to get money from the average joe. When actually, it's been the telecoms screwing over average joe with all of the extra charges we were paying for years that were supposed to have brought us all great broadband service years ago.
On my P4 2.6 GHz laptop, Vista (RC1) runs like a pig, while KDE, Gnome, and Windows XP are all fine. Vista RC1 is much better than Beta 2 was, but it still crawls. And Vista can't even run the Aero Glass effects, whereas the same hardware has no problem with Beryl/XGL in Gnome.
The GP has a point. From what I understand the Mac OS X releases get faster with each release, Gnome had a release recently that improved performance, and KDE is going to do the same thing with their next major release. That's one advantage to having more frequent release schedules... When you only release every 5 years, you put so much effort into big huge features to try to wow everyone, those features take more resources, and there's no room for performance improvements. All of the other Desktop Environments are all working constantly on making things better for the hardware that's out there right now... I'd like to see the release build of Vista running on hardware that was available when Vista/Longhorn was announced. It wouldn't do so well.
Crap! Mine was already at 0!
:(
No, no. He edits it without writing, then does the first theatrical release, then he writes it for the second theatrical release. Then there's more writing for the third theatrical release, and of course it goes without saying that each of the 5 or 6 VHS/DVD editions is rewritten. I'm still waiting for Star Wars Episodes 2 & 3 where Yoda doesn't fight at all. I can't wait to see those movies get worse. Although maybe the midi-colorians (sp?) will get written out entirely for the 20-year special edition theatrical re-release of the prequels.
Speaking of prequels, that's one thing we have to hope and pray about... with Harrison Ford being 20+ years old, please, please don't make this a prequel... everyone else is doing prequels.
Some people consider Windows XP to be a point release of 2000. But even if XP was a major release, they still went from 2001 until Jan 2007 before making a new release (to consumers, anyhow). Sounds like KDE has until 2008 to make a new release before they're any worse than MS, if you're going strictly by "major" releases.
But even just looking at the point releases... KDE got tons better in 3.2, then again in 3.3 then in 3.4, and now 3.5... It really compares more against OSX's almost yearly "point" releases, which have all had quite a few improvements in functionality and style. Personally, after playing around with KDE for a while and enjoying it's earlier support for compositing, I went back to Gnome, and thoroughly enjoy using it (and now with Beryl/Xgl, the transparency in KDE isn't an exclusive feature in the Linux world anymore). I like Gnome, so I'm not really looking for any major changes to it... I don't want changes to get in the way of how I like to use it. It helps me use and enjoy my computer.
I do have one of the Vista RC's in a dual-boot setup on my laptop, but I only use it for work, where the software is Windows-only. I don't care for Vista. I have a hard time understanding why Vista can't pull off cool effects on the same hardware that Beryl/Xgl work so well on. But even if it could, MS is trying so hard to make an appealing product, when Gnome/KDE/Apple just plain make great products. MS wants to let us all know how hard they're trying to be cool, but in the end, they're just trying. Sure, Microsoft has a new major release coming out right now, but it has actually complicated the experience of using my computer, making me that much happier with Gnome.
Obviously.
That's because he's asking about non-"n00b" questions... With Linux, you're expected to have to ask around on forums a read lots of man pages to learn how to do the kinds of tasks that Linux people do. He wants to know how to do the same types of things in OS X, but he's expecting those things to come as easily as the normal every day user tasks in OS X. Just because it's made by Apple doesn't mean messing with the "under-the-hood" things is easier than it is with Linux. You still have to do some work and research to understand the internals.
Wow... I didn't think that doing simple desktop tasks on a Mac could be as complicated as getting NVidia drivers working in Linux!
(I'm kidding... kind of.)
KnoppMyth will run a frontend system as a LiveCD. Obviously, for the backend part, it would have to be installed, but KnoppMyth does have LiveCD functionality.
Of course, that input requires a special implantation surgery... From Hot Shots:
"It's called a multipupiloptomy, but in order to keep from damaging the eye sockets they have to go in through the rectum... Ain't no man gonna take that route with me!"
Don't forget the Van Dyke Brown!
Wow, I always thought the Bon Target was just a family joke. I haven't lived by a Bon Marché for about 10 years now, so noone around me ever understands the Bon Target joke, but now the Bon Marché in my parents' hometown as well as my local Meier & Frank store are all Macy's stores now, so I guess the joke is truly dead. If only Beowulf cluster jokes on slashdot would die (and Netcraft could confirm it).
the reviews of the PS3's BluRay features and playback are absolutely gushing and calling it the best player on the market
If I'm not mistaken, the PS3 is only the 2nd Blu-Ray player on the market... There's the Samsung player, which has been out for a little while now, the PS3, and the Sony one won't be released until just before Christmas, I believe. Pioneer and Philips should have players... eventually... but for now they're getting screwed over by the already short supply of blue lasers going to the PS3. I'm sure the main reason the Sony BD player has been delayed so much is also because of the blue laser shortage.
Given the fact that the Samsung player is already running into Blu-Ray discs it can't play, and the Sony Blu-Ray player is going to need at least 2 firmware updates to play certain discs and to use the Java interactive features when it does finally launch, I'd say there's not much competition for the PS3 in the current market.
But then I'd be surprised if a $500/$600 dollar game machine can be a better BD player than a dedicated $1000 machine, too... I'm sure the PS3 will have its share of BD problems.
Nintendo has always innovated with their controllers. You're only listing the ones that were failures. Oh, and they didn't make the Power Glove, that was a third-party accessory.
My point was precisely that the original controller is what matters in a console, that's what developers will design for. It's the add-ons that haven't done well, with very limited games designed for them. Of course I'm counting the Wiimote as the original controller, the GGP said above that Sony or MS could just copy the Wiimote and make it as an add-on for their systems. My point was that as an add-on it doesn't make sense or rise above the gimmick level, and it wouldn't have games developed for it. As the original controller for the system (and the heart of the Wii philosophy), it will spur a lot of new thinking about how game controls are designed. Lots of developers will design games for it because it is the primary interface for the whole console.
The actual Nintendo controllers have always set the standard in the industry since the NES. As you described, every generation of Nintendo consoles has had some great new features in the controller, which are then copied by the next generation of the other consoles. I wouldn't be surprised at all if the stock controllers on the new consoles 5 years from now will have built-in speakers, non-volatile memory for holding players' avatars, and motion sensing functionality (OK, Sony already stepped into that one with the sixaxis).