Maybe they should have put a big red R in the word turbo for racing, so that people will believe their browser goes faster. Or they should give all their users a Type-R sticker to print out.
as in: "Ma! It loaded the page in.05 milliseconds instead of.1 milliseconds! I can see the difference! It's definitely faster."/etc etc
You are looking at the wrong statistics. The most profitable dealers have remained open. It's not about performance, it's about profitability on both ends. Those two are not necessarily tied together. You can be a poor performer and there are tons of ways to make excess additional amounts per sale to the manufacturer, and this is in fact quite common at dealerships that have lower volume of sales.
You're arguing with the wrong person. It makes perfect sense to me and you.
It does not, unfortunately, when argued from a business perspective. If your business is in financially hard times right now, how are you going to make the case to spend more to save more later? It's kind of a hard case at that point. Most companies do not understand how big of a priority IT is, and/or maybe it isn't? Who are we to speak for that. 9 times out of 10 though, it's either a lack of understanding or other priorities. Of course it's in their interest as opposed to my own, but those types of phrases will fall on dead ears in a business meeting unless you are the IT director. There is no way to say such a phrase appropriately in a business setting if you don't have the clout to get people to listen to it. In the end, corporate politics trumps necessary IT changes.
Also, migration doesn't happen overnight. there's lots of in house testing at smart companies, etc, to make sure things work. Companies aren't that flexible outright until they can shed off the IE6 the problems that has. It's not like "oh hey, we're done with IE6, lets go swap to chrome. Sure, that'll handle our CSS fine!/whoops"
What you're saying is idealist and all, but not even closely attributed to reality in an enterprise. The costs to migrate off of everything you have, in the short term, are much higher than the longterm savings that IE8/firefox will give. Not everything is magically black and white like you say.
Hell, I'd love to get into a position so I can make that kind of statement like you just said and have it actually be listened to but let me assure you at many companies that is an idea that there isn't even an position for: common sense software basically.
sadly true and agreed as a concept however how many people are really in the category of not knowing what a proxy is? China is an extremely tech savvy/tech friendly company, so wouldn't it be the minority who don't know what a proxy is? I could be completely wrong, just inquiring/rhetorically.
Yup. There are plenty of proxies out there too, so what exactly is this going to do? Not to mention every app just mentioned can easily be run on most china phones, so it's not like people have to be in net cafes in China to do said activities.
You can't do that to a business though. Ours hates IE6 and is migrating to firefox support but lets look at it this way: if a client is stupid/stubborn and uses IE6 and brings in 10+ million bucks a year for example, would you be able to just say "sorry, we can't support you" when you know there's competition? Not all people welcome browser changes with open arms even if it's just plain ignorance. You'd be dropped for your competitors faster than you could hit send on that email.
I wonder if anyone else sees the possibility of using android's API's for touch screen to make devices to for ebooks? Not that I like the ebook market or care for it, but it certainly seems logical.
Of course. We then have a reason to say "okay, we encrypted our stuff, so why do you have to look at it?" as opposed to it being considered "in plain sight"/not protected and then all your amendments are basically waived.
Cars will specify if they are E85 compatible. It's a government-ish program and will involve a stamp on the vehicle that says flex fuel or E85 friendly. If it's not there, guess what, you're not E85 friendly.
No, this is not a magic computer fix either. Car parts are designed entirely differently to handle the more corrosive aspects, both from an engineering and from an insurance standpoint. It probably involves more expensive components which a manufacturer obviously wouldn't want to introduce as soon as possible. If you want to kill your car, be my guest, but generally not a good idea.
Really, people are talking about E85 killing gas mileage more. You think car manufacturers want to have their 35 mile honda civic now being rated at 26 miles to the gallon all over again?
Apparently you have a blatant misunderstanding of what nutrition does vs abundance.
Actually unhealthy folks (3rd world) tend to be fatter, contrary to the image of the starving skin and bones somalian children. Healthier folks SHOULD be skinnier. However, us americans are fat people who eat too much, thus all the healthy food in the world doesn't help when you have your 4th portion.
Re:Brazilian Ethanol [Re:Don't blame me]
on
The Great Ethanol Scam
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
Apparently there is some difficult understanding here; allow me to provide the information that you seemed to neglect.
95% ethanol doesn't ruin cars designed to run it. However, 15% ethanol will ruin cars designed to run 10%.
See the difference here? If we go all ethanol, fine, do it. This wishy washy crap is just horrible and suckling up to the gas needs of countries which hold us by the balls due to gas dependency.
Brazillians seem to have a good climate for cane sugar, some of the US may or may not as well. I am not an agricultural specialist.
late response, but your idea and definition is way off.
In world of warcraft for example, a new instance is not created for each group; people are able to join another individual or group's instance via their ID. In the same sense another person can join the "instance" (deadspace) created for a mission in eve. It's just less control of that in eve.
Instancing has a variety of forms, "instance dungeon" is just an inaccurate term and appropriately cited as inaccurate. As the wiki article says: "This article does not cite any references or sources."
Basically, the true definition of instancing is not agreed on by anyone.
Actually, I disagree. Think about what a deadspace for a mission is. It isn't generated, isn't there, until eve creates it when you accept a mission and/or scan out a DED complex successfully. Thus for all intensive purposes other people CAN find it, but it's the equivalent of an instance of the game, thus the definition of the word it's an area generated. Just because other people can get into it doesn't mean it's any less of an instance.
I compare this to instances as a concept of guild wars and/or warcraft, except that other people can join it too. Just because it's "in a zone" doesn't really reflect outside of that. Think of this like raid instances in wow spawning in a random place in a zone once you accept a quest. Sound familiar? When you warp to something outside of said ded/instance, it's just like exiting the instance itself basically. Wow can do that in seconds so it makes sense that eve can as well.
Wormholes are not random, there is a set of about 27 sleeper holes (I have it bookmarked somewhere) that you can get into and an infinite number of travel exits/entrances. However, the DED's in a wormhole were what I meant (sorry for not explaining that).
This may be a projector thing, but they are doing something of physical manipulation. It would be pretty much appropriate to be patented. The whole thing is physically transformative. Meanwhile, if someone made their own version using something different, it too, would be patentable/improvement patent, which is how the patent system is supposed to work.
To be clear, I'm saying the system as a whole should be patentable (infrared), but not the software used to decode it.
yeah, I should have typed that a bit more distinctly, but I agree.
What I meant was that you can essentially run XP software with better support via linux/wine than you can via windows 7's built in shoddy virtualization and/or piss poor "xp mode". I can only pity those trying to run an XP version of games/anything graphically dependant under the virtualization in W7 for example, whereas most windows software and even gaming is basically a non-issue for linux.
Eve is the only graphical MMO that supports as many people as it does under a single server/shard. Wow has more people in total/subscriber base but has nowhere near the number of concurrent players as Eve. Wow starts to lag (500ms to timeout on pings) around 6k people online on their best servers. When even a 300 people gather in a zone other than a battleground, it's a lagfest. Eve itself can only handle about 1000-1500 in a single zone before things get beyond laggy, although most people will never see so many/such an experience. I'm sure bandwidth requirements are equally high for wow and eve. However, when you look at the details, there are some interesting things. Essentially missions are instanced (deadspace) within a zone (solar system) if you think about it. Wow does this for raids, Eve does this for all missions and raid equivalents (wormholes) basically, all while delivering a pretty darn good play experience to people across different countries without having to fuss with EU/US/Asia servers etc.
Anyway, There are other benefits of a single shard that make things more and less interesting: your character has persistence at that point - so short of making a new character everyone knows who someone is, which is good. Of course, at some point there is a concern about limited namespace but given that eve allows special characters due to the other languages that play, that becomes less of an issue.
It's not just eve's server capacity that is just damn near impressive, but also their ways of managing all the single shard aspects as well. Eve is still very groundbreaking in how they do their shards. However, from a "people gathering in one place" perspective, eve has made the game expansive enough that you don't get clustering issues. Figure the size of all of wow's zones/instances and multiply it by 100 and you are probably close to equivalent space for players in eve. Thus, there is no "too many people". Basically eve was created with that flexibility, not many other games have done that. As example: you don't hear of any FPS servers going above 64 or even 128 people usually, and you don't hear of many games designed or even having capability of more than a few hundred in a "Room".
Apparently you understand nothing. Sweating is a natural action and whether you are arnold schwarzenegger or Roseanne you're going to sweat if you are sufficiently stimulated, which does not have to mean physical exercise.
as much as yes, these things can make people fat, how are they trying to put video games into this? People actually SWEAT from video games. This is like saying a racecar driver gets fat because he's sitting the whole time, which many know is not true at all.
Got to love the idea too, pay extra even if you are, say, someone in shape who merely wants to cheat on their diet once in a blue moon, now should be taxed extra too. Sheesh.
Someone will have to still deal with MS bundling their crapware version of virtualization aka "xp mode" (notable lack of openGL/D3D support) into the OS - this will be antitrust - IE style, round two.
Slashdot Mirror
Wait, someone voted for a Browser Helper Object? I've never heard of one being elected, personally.
Maybe they should have put a big red R in the word turbo for racing, so that people will believe their browser goes faster. Or they should give all their users a Type-R sticker to print out.
as in: "Ma! It loaded the page in .05 milliseconds instead of .1 milliseconds! I can see the difference! It's definitely faster." /etc etc
You are looking at the wrong statistics. The most profitable dealers have remained open. It's not about performance, it's about profitability on both ends. Those two are not necessarily tied together. You can be a poor performer and there are tons of ways to make excess additional amounts per sale to the manufacturer, and this is in fact quite common at dealerships that have lower volume of sales.
You're arguing with the wrong person. It makes perfect sense to me and you.
It does not, unfortunately, when argued from a business perspective. If your business is in financially hard times right now, how are you going to make the case to spend more to save more later? It's kind of a hard case at that point. Most companies do not understand how big of a priority IT is, and/or maybe it isn't? Who are we to speak for that. 9 times out of 10 though, it's either a lack of understanding or other priorities. Of course it's in their interest as opposed to my own, but those types of phrases will fall on dead ears in a business meeting unless you are the IT director. There is no way to say such a phrase appropriately in a business setting if you don't have the clout to get people to listen to it. In the end, corporate politics trumps necessary IT changes.
Also, migration doesn't happen overnight. there's lots of in house testing at smart companies, etc, to make sure things work. Companies aren't that flexible outright until they can shed off the IE6 the problems that has. It's not like "oh hey, we're done with IE6, lets go swap to chrome. Sure, that'll handle our CSS fine! /whoops"
What you're saying is idealist and all, but not even closely attributed to reality in an enterprise. The costs to migrate off of everything you have, in the short term, are much higher than the longterm savings that IE8/firefox will give. Not everything is magically black and white like you say.
Hell, I'd love to get into a position so I can make that kind of statement like you just said and have it actually be listened to but let me assure you at many companies that is an idea that there isn't even an position for: common sense software basically.
sadly true and agreed as a concept however how many people are really in the category of not knowing what a proxy is? China is an extremely tech savvy/tech friendly company, so wouldn't it be the minority who don't know what a proxy is? I could be completely wrong, just inquiring/rhetorically.
Yup. There are plenty of proxies out there too, so what exactly is this going to do? Not to mention every app just mentioned can easily be run on most china phones, so it's not like people have to be in net cafes in China to do said activities.
You can't do that to a business though. Ours hates IE6 and is migrating to firefox support but lets look at it this way: if a client is stupid/stubborn and uses IE6 and brings in 10+ million bucks a year for example, would you be able to just say "sorry, we can't support you" when you know there's competition? Not all people welcome browser changes with open arms even if it's just plain ignorance. You'd be dropped for your competitors faster than you could hit send on that email.
I wonder if anyone else sees the possibility of using android's API's for touch screen to make devices to for ebooks? Not that I like the ebook market or care for it, but it certainly seems logical.
If I am wrong, please feel free to correct me.
lots of people do not even bother to change anything on a new pc - they just have no idea what things they are doing using IE.
Car analogy: it's like using honda branded gasoline for a honda without realizing that you could use anyone's and get the same mileage.
etc etc.
Of course. We then have a reason to say "okay, we encrypted our stuff, so why do you have to look at it?"
as opposed to it being considered "in plain sight"/not protected and then all your amendments are basically waived.
Incorrect. The line is "locks keep honest people honest".
Cars will specify if they are E85 compatible. It's a government-ish program and will involve a stamp on the vehicle that says flex fuel or E85 friendly. If it's not there, guess what, you're not E85 friendly.
No, this is not a magic computer fix either. Car parts are designed entirely differently to handle the more corrosive aspects, both from an engineering and from an insurance standpoint. It probably involves more expensive components which a manufacturer obviously wouldn't want to introduce as soon as possible. If you want to kill your car, be my guest, but generally not a good idea.
Really, people are talking about E85 killing gas mileage more. You think car manufacturers want to have their 35 mile honda civic now being rated at 26 miles to the gallon all over again?
Apparently you have a blatant misunderstanding of what nutrition does vs abundance.
Actually unhealthy folks (3rd world) tend to be fatter, contrary to the image of the starving skin and bones somalian children. Healthier folks SHOULD be skinnier. However, us americans are fat people who eat too much, thus all the healthy food in the world doesn't help when you have your 4th portion.
Apparently there is some difficult understanding here; allow me to provide the information that you seemed to neglect.
95% ethanol doesn't ruin cars designed to run it. However, 15% ethanol will ruin cars designed to run 10%.
See the difference here? If we go all ethanol, fine, do it. This wishy washy crap is just horrible and suckling up to the gas needs of countries which hold us by the balls due to gas dependency.
Brazillians seem to have a good climate for cane sugar, some of the US may or may not as well. I am not an agricultural specialist.
late response, but your idea and definition is way off.
In world of warcraft for example, a new instance is not created for each group; people are able to join another individual or group's instance via their ID. In the same sense another person can join the "instance" (deadspace) created for a mission in eve. It's just less control of that in eve.
Instancing has a variety of forms, "instance dungeon" is just an inaccurate term and appropriately cited as inaccurate. As the wiki article says: "This article does not cite any references or sources."
Basically, the true definition of instancing is not agreed on by anyone.
Actually, I disagree. Think about what a deadspace for a mission is. It isn't generated, isn't there, until eve creates it when you accept a mission and/or scan out a DED complex successfully. Thus for all intensive purposes other people CAN find it, but it's the equivalent of an instance of the game, thus the definition of the word it's an area generated. Just because other people can get into it doesn't mean it's any less of an instance.
I compare this to instances as a concept of guild wars and/or warcraft, except that other people can join it too. Just because it's "in a zone" doesn't really reflect outside of that. Think of this like raid instances in wow spawning in a random place in a zone once you accept a quest. Sound familiar? When you warp to something outside of said ded/instance, it's just like exiting the instance itself basically. Wow can do that in seconds so it makes sense that eve can as well.
Wormholes are not random, there is a set of about 27 sleeper holes (I have it bookmarked somewhere) that you can get into and an infinite number of travel exits/entrances. However, the DED's in a wormhole were what I meant (sorry for not explaining that).
This may be a projector thing, but they are doing something of physical manipulation. It would be pretty much appropriate to be patented. The whole thing is physically transformative. Meanwhile, if someone made their own version using something different, it too, would be patentable/improvement patent, which is how the patent system is supposed to work.
To be clear, I'm saying the system as a whole should be patentable (infrared), but not the software used to decode it.
yeah, I should have typed that a bit more distinctly, but I agree.
What I meant was that you can essentially run XP software with better support via linux/wine than you can via windows 7's built in shoddy virtualization and/or piss poor "xp mode". I can only pity those trying to run an XP version of games/anything graphically dependant under the virtualization in W7 for example, whereas most windows software and even gaming is basically a non-issue for linux.
Eve is the only graphical MMO that supports as many people as it does under a single server/shard. Wow has more people in total/subscriber base but has nowhere near the number of concurrent players as Eve. Wow starts to lag (500ms to timeout on pings) around 6k people online on their best servers. When even a 300 people gather in a zone other than a battleground, it's a lagfest. Eve itself can only handle about 1000-1500 in a single zone before things get beyond laggy, although most people will never see so many/such an experience. I'm sure bandwidth requirements are equally high for wow and eve. However, when you look at the details, there are some interesting things. Essentially missions are instanced (deadspace) within a zone (solar system) if you think about it. Wow does this for raids, Eve does this for all missions and raid equivalents (wormholes) basically, all while delivering a pretty darn good play experience to people across different countries without having to fuss with EU/US/Asia servers etc.
Anyway, There are other benefits of a single shard that make things more and less interesting: your character has persistence at that point - so short of making a new character everyone knows who someone is, which is good. Of course, at some point there is a concern about limited namespace but given that eve allows special characters due to the other languages that play, that becomes less of an issue.
It's not just eve's server capacity that is just damn near impressive, but also their ways of managing all the single shard aspects as well. Eve is still very groundbreaking in how they do their shards. However, from a "people gathering in one place" perspective, eve has made the game expansive enough that you don't get clustering issues. Figure the size of all of wow's zones/instances and multiply it by 100 and you are probably close to equivalent space for players in eve. Thus, there is no "too many people". Basically eve was created with that flexibility, not many other games have done that. As example: you don't hear of any FPS servers going above 64 or even 128 people usually, and you don't hear of many games designed or even having capability of more than a few hundred in a "Room".
There's a difference. Linux actually supports openGL via wine, whereas W7 (and no other windows virtualization equivalent other than wine) does not.
Apparently you understand nothing. Sweating is a natural action and whether you are arnold schwarzenegger or Roseanne you're going to sweat if you are sufficiently stimulated, which does not have to mean physical exercise.
This has nothing to do with button mashing.
you forgot the word "accurately", which is more important.
Think of this like voting machines where you hit democrat and it puts in a republican vote. Does it still "work"?
as much as yes, these things can make people fat, how are they trying to put video games into this? People actually SWEAT from video games. This is like saying a racecar driver gets fat because he's sitting the whole time, which many know is not true at all.
Got to love the idea too, pay extra even if you are, say, someone in shape who merely wants to cheat on their diet once in a blue moon, now should be taxed extra too. Sheesh.
So yeah, nothing but moneygrab.
Someone will have to still deal with MS bundling their crapware version of virtualization aka "xp mode" (notable lack of openGL/D3D support) into the OS - this will be antitrust - IE style, round two.