While DA:O is a superior game, in my opinion, and much newer, I believe that the system requirements to run Oblivion are more than likely just as high if not higher than DA:O.
Besides owning a large truck that is never used for hauling or off road sporting, nothing says "I have a small penis" like owning something from Apple.
I love it when the obvious insecurities of socially repressed slashdotters manifests itself in pure nerd-rage.
Well, it's not a netbook for one. That makes it better. The story jokes, but the "magic" he refers to is the (obvious) user experience vs. traditional netbooks or even laptops.
At the risk of sounding condescending and snobby...
I really think that people are not able to envision the future use of the iPad, which causes them to not like it. Right now in their brains it doesn't do what they want it to do, and they aren't sure what it even does.
I think, given some time, it will become more clear that it is a "game-changing" device for the future of computing.
I realize I'm in the super-minority here and sound like a fanboy (I actually gave away the only Mac i've ever purchased, to my sister, but I do have an iPhone). I also think that giving people "more of the same" is exactly what we don't need.
Again, I'm not saying anyone is "stupid" or something ridiculous like that, or that i'm some sort of visionary. I honestly just think it's a matter of the product getting into the hands of people before they actually like it.
I don't know about you, but a netbook that turns into a tablet is about the last thing I wanted the iPad to be. Do i want a more clumsy way of doing things I already (don't) do on a netbook? Not really.
I want a paradigm shift in the way we use computers. The Lenovo device to me, looks like more of the same, with a worse way of doing it. The iPad looks like something we haven't really thought of on this scale.
So, in conclusion, the iPad is what I wanted the iPad to be.
By and large, it's just a bunch of white guys hiring their friends into ridiculously high paying jobs with no skills other than being good at socializing with other white guys. Sorry about the egregiousness, but somebody had to say it.
Comments like this really don't help anything. Not only is your comment highly untrue, but it demonstrates a level of jealousy and personal issues that we really aren't interested in discussing.
If you think that these ridiculously high paying jobs require no skills and nothing other than a buddy from the tennis club downtown, then why aren't you doing that? Many of these jobs require skills that you may consider "talent-less", but unless you are able to do them, the demand for those talents becomes higher. And lets face it, you can't do them. The job responsibilities of these individuals require a high level of skill and talent to succeed in a competitive market like technology.
Basically, you're commenting from the talent-less pool of individuals who think they are being oppressed by some "good ole boys club" and can't do anything about it. You're free to think that, but you might want to aim higher.
Sorry for the egregiousness, but somebody had to say it (again).
Not sure why everyone here is attacking the guy.
There are plenty of companies that will do on-site IT support for a certain amount of time each week. He could have on-site personnel at a fraction of the cost of a full-time employee. I know because I work for a firm that provides exactly this service.
I guess you missed where I said "possibly." The reason I said "possibly" is both due to the things you mentioned and also due to the fact that it is still a PPC chip, and therefore it's possible that OSX would run on it with some modifications.
Yes, it depends on what they are doing in parallel. However, for 95% of actual commercial parallel computing, this chip would be bad. I should have specified further, as I was referring to clusters specifically, and not grid computing.
Neither of those points should have any impact whatsoever on whether to buy an xbox360 or a PS3. If you like playing console games, both systems are sweet. If you have to choose one, it's probably because of a game avaliable on one system and not the other.
IBM manufactures PowerPC chips. So these are IBM CPUs, not "Apple CPUs." Interestingly enough, Apple is now switching to Intel chips, and will no longer be using IBM's PowerPC chips.
Apple doesn't want OSX to be able to run on any x86 hardware because then they'd be out of business. Not because their hardware is somehow superior to other x86 hardware. It isn't. They make their money off of selling an entire solution; hardware and software that work very well together. Most of their money comes from the hardware sales. They don't want to be another OS vendor.
There are plenty of x86 machines that could run OSX, but Apple won't let because they'd lose money. It's understandable in my opinion.
That's the whole point, it's all opinions. I was proving that I could make an opinion appear as fact just as easily as the GP.
On a side note, I actually do consider WinXP (base install, SP1, SP2, no real differences) to be more useable and functional than Gnome or KDE. This is an opinion, which is the whole point. I would never make a comment like this:
'Linux was based off of Unix, so what do you get? None of the distributions are innovative, creative, cutting edge, they are all just "good enough".'
Please avoid replying with things like: 1. "Yeah but i'd like to see you put that SP1 XP box on the net for 5min and see whch was more useable then!!!1 ROFFLE"
I'm talking about me here. Not the general public. I know what I'm doing and could keep a base install XP system virus free and on the internet, behind a linksys router, for years if necessary.
2. "Yeah but Linux doesn't have CLIPPY!"
Oh man. It's so hard to disable the office assistant. So hard. You can even choose to not install it! INSANE!
Look, some people (most?) actually like Windows better than Linux. Wow. Crazy. Insane. I must be mentally retarded.
Slashdot Mirror
I think he means the point at which you hit great diminishing returns on the $/performance graph of CPUs.
While DA:O is a superior game, in my opinion, and much newer, I believe that the system requirements to run Oblivion are more than likely just as high if not higher than DA:O.
Besides owning a large truck that is never used for hauling or off road sporting, nothing says "I have a small penis" like owning something from Apple.
I love it when the obvious insecurities of socially repressed slashdotters manifests itself in pure nerd-rage.
And what makes the Ipad better?
Well, it's not a netbook for one. That makes it better. The story jokes, but the "magic" he refers to is the (obvious) user experience vs. traditional netbooks or even laptops.
At the risk of sounding condescending and snobby...
I really think that people are not able to envision the future use of the iPad, which causes them to not like it. Right now in their brains it doesn't do what they want it to do, and they aren't sure what it even does.
I think, given some time, it will become more clear that it is a "game-changing" device for the future of computing.
I realize I'm in the super-minority here and sound like a fanboy (I actually gave away the only Mac i've ever purchased, to my sister, but I do have an iPhone). I also think that giving people "more of the same" is exactly what we don't need.
Again, I'm not saying anyone is "stupid" or something ridiculous like that, or that i'm some sort of visionary. I honestly just think it's a matter of the product getting into the hands of people before they actually like it.
I don't know about you, but a netbook that turns into a tablet is about the last thing I wanted the iPad to be. Do i want a more clumsy way of doing things I already (don't) do on a netbook? Not really. I want a paradigm shift in the way we use computers. The Lenovo device to me, looks like more of the same, with a worse way of doing it. The iPad looks like something we haven't really thought of on this scale. So, in conclusion, the iPad is what I wanted the iPad to be.
By and large, it's just a bunch of white guys hiring their friends into ridiculously high paying jobs with no skills other than being good at socializing with other white guys. Sorry about the egregiousness, but somebody had to say it.
Comments like this really don't help anything. Not only is your comment highly untrue, but it demonstrates a level of jealousy and personal issues that we really aren't interested in discussing.
If you think that these ridiculously high paying jobs require no skills and nothing other than a buddy from the tennis club downtown, then why aren't you doing that? Many of these jobs require skills that you may consider "talent-less", but unless you are able to do them, the demand for those talents becomes higher. And lets face it, you can't do them. The job responsibilities of these individuals require a high level of skill and talent to succeed in a competitive market like technology.
Basically, you're commenting from the talent-less pool of individuals who think they are being oppressed by some "good ole boys club" and can't do anything about it. You're free to think that, but you might want to aim higher.
Sorry for the egregiousness, but somebody had to say it (again).
Not sure why everyone here is attacking the guy. There are plenty of companies that will do on-site IT support for a certain amount of time each week. He could have on-site personnel at a fraction of the cost of a full-time employee. I know because I work for a firm that provides exactly this service.
Is there something wrong with drinking and fucking?
:) I know you said, "restricted to", yeah yeah...
Sorry, just had to ask.
Probably the best reason is that you are an idiot.
What debate?
This chip is still a fairly general purpose CPU.
You're talking about it like it's a Cell or something.
I guess you missed where I said "possibly." The reason I said "possibly" is both due to the things you mentioned and also due to the fact that it is still a PPC chip, and therefore it's possible that OSX would run on it with some modifications.
Either way, that wasn't really my point at all.
Yes, it depends on what they are doing in parallel. However, for 95% of actual commercial parallel computing, this chip would be bad. I should have specified further, as I was referring to clusters specifically, and not grid computing.
Agreeing with you... minor thing to further support your argument:
Xbox360 supports HD out of the box. Today. In stores.
Neither of those points should have any impact whatsoever on whether to buy an xbox360 or a PS3. If you like playing console games, both systems are sweet. If you have to choose one, it's probably because of a game avaliable on one system and not the other.
With 1MB of shared cache for 3 cores, these chips would actually be very poor at parallel computing.
FSB speed != core speed Each core runs at 3.2GHz.
IBM makes PowerPC, not Apple. If it was able to run OSX (possibly), it would run it about as sweetly as any normal to high end Apple machine.
IBM manufactures PowerPC chips. So these are IBM CPUs, not "Apple CPUs." Interestingly enough, Apple is now switching to Intel chips, and will no longer be using IBM's PowerPC chips.
You seem to be missing the point.
Apple doesn't want OSX to be able to run on any x86 hardware because then they'd be out of business. Not because their hardware is somehow superior to other x86 hardware. It isn't. They make their money off of selling an entire solution; hardware and software that work very well together. Most of their money comes from the hardware sales. They don't want to be another OS vendor.
There are plenty of x86 machines that could run OSX, but Apple won't let because they'd lose money. It's understandable in my opinion.
Some people do. You don't. Don't watch it. Was that really that hard?
Couple those facts with the additional fact that pretty much everything he says about OO.org is true, and what do you get?
A worthless post.
99.9% of people buying computers don't know that, and wouldn't care if they did...
That's the whole point, it's all opinions. I was proving that I could make an opinion appear as fact just as easily as the GP.
On a side note, I actually do consider WinXP (base install, SP1, SP2, no real differences) to be more useable and functional than Gnome or KDE. This is an opinion, which is the whole point. I would never make a comment like this:
'Linux was based off of Unix, so what do you get? None of the distributions are innovative, creative, cutting edge, they are all just "good enough".'
Please avoid replying with things like:
1. "Yeah but i'd like to see you put that SP1 XP box on the net for 5min and see whch was more useable then!!!1 ROFFLE"
I'm talking about me here. Not the general public. I know what I'm doing and could keep a base install XP system virus free and on the internet, behind a linksys router, for years if necessary.
2. "Yeah but Linux doesn't have CLIPPY!"
Oh man. It's so hard to disable the office assistant. So hard. You can even choose to not install it! INSANE!
Look, some people (most?) actually like Windows better than Linux. Wow. Crazy. Insane. I must be mentally retarded.