I've got a tx1 and I love it. While watching TV if I get an instant message I just reach over and touch the flashing icon for the chat window and voila! I can view the IM or easily check my email all without needing to actually try and awkwardly use the laptop off to the side.
Yeah I expect "The Year of Good Enough Hardware" will coincide with the 10th anniversary of the "Year of Linux on the Desktop".
We didn't need fast computers for everyday computing and then we started indexing the entire hard drive. We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we started watching YouTube h264. We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we wanted to be able to preview documents without opening them. We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we wanted to be able to...
Except the only "retailer" mentioned in the story was sony. And to me Sony is nothing more than a distributor not a retailer.
He talks about hypotheticals in the article. "If game companies were to start selling online then they would be teaching their consumers that there is an easier way."
But from what I've seen Game Retailers seem to feel that way already and are content to slowly fade into oblivion.
So as I said before. It's a pretty misleading headline to imply that Game Retailers are actively working to right now to undermine their business with online sales--since the only example provided was the Microsoft/Sony online store type arrangement.
How is it that "Game Retailers" are hurting "Themselves".
Shouldn't the headline read "Online Game Distributors killing Game Retailers"?
I haven't seen any actions on the Game Retailers part that is hurting themselves except for existing. I suppose you could argue they should have become what steam is. But that's passively letting yourself die out.
I've been to church 'once or twice'. Which is how I know that: Revenge (Capitol Punishment), War Mongering (Kill the Terrorists!), Intolerance (Kill the Fags!), Greed (Cut assistance to impoverished families!) and the other trappings of the modern American conservative movement are at odds with a man who disavowed wealth, taught humility and generosity.
If we were to really follow in Christ's steps we would be a bunch of hippy communists who give up everything we have to serve those most in need.
There's a terrible irony that the conservative movement has attached itself to the most inhumane and socially unconsciounable platforms while simultaneously claiming some sort of divine ordination.
Can you see Jesus waterboarding terrorists? Can you see Jesus cutting health insurance for children? Can you see Jesus denying a group of people the right to marry and interfering in state affairs? Can you see Jesus lobbying Pilot to pass laws to exclude a group of people from Roman Life? Can you see Jesus suggesting that we shouldn't talk to enemies? Can you see Jesus advocating toxic dumping and pollution because it's "not financially vaible to be stewards of the earth?". Can you see Jesus mocking the environmental movement for wanting to protect his creation? Can you see Jesus mocking doves and calling them "silly spineless liberals". Can you see Jesus wanting to have anything to do with Rush Limbaugh? Can you see Jesus wanting anything to do with Sean Hannity?
The conservatives have claimed God in the US. But if there is a Jesus and Lord then he's got to be pissed with what they're doing with his supposed endorsement.
You clearly don't understand American Christianity.
In American Christianity God says: "Be nice to your neighbor.* As defined by a lawyer so as to not get sued." "Feed the poor.* But fight foodstamps and welfare tooth and nail." "Store up your treasures in heaven not here on earth.* But if someone suggests that maybe you should pay higher taxes cry communism and theft." "Do not lend to your neighbor and expect a return.* Unless he took out a mortage then he's irresponsible and had better pay back every penny!"
What can the mooon offer us in asteroid survivability that the south pole can't?
At least there is an abundance of Oxygen.
If you want "the good of humanity" then you want nuclear power or space solar power to power our hydroponics systems.
That's all that we need to survive a massive asteroid impact. Lots of electricity that isn't reliant on the sun.
We can heat homes. Heat farms. Heat our structures. We can filter air. We can filter water. We can recycle phosphates and other fertilizers.
I can't possibly think of a scenario in which an underwater or arctic base wouldn't be superior to a moon base post impact (excpet if the base gets directly hit by the asteroid... in which case we should build 3.)
The biodome failed due to oxygen. That's not a problem on earth unless something truley bizzare happens.
Now that's not to say that one astronaut can't accomplish more in 3 days than a robot in months just that the whole "we need a space colony or we're all going to die" holds no weight in my head.
Same with the "We're going to over populate the planet." argument. You know... except again for antartica and the ocean. Two places we haven't even begun to colonize but have enough space that's far more inhabitable than mars.
If we go to space in mass my guess will be it'll be to mine heavy metals as we use up our copper etc.
I've found that suburbs tend to get highspeed pipes faster than cities. And cities tend to get pipes faster than rural areas.
FIOS is less than 12 miles from my house. They predict it might reach my neighborhood sometime in the next 5 years. At work less than 4 miles away Comcast is offering 40mbps for $110. Less than 300 yards away I could get 20/5 for $60. But everything in my neighborhood, west and south for 4 miles is limited to 6/1 for $50 or 4/1 for $60.
That's why I say "most". There are always nice pockets of highspeed coverage. Comcast being the best and most consistent I've found. But most people only have a crappy cable company which they can buy from especially if you factor in the rural population (which is almost most by themselves).
Road Runner TWC, $63 15/2 FIOS 10/2, 20/5, 20/20 $10 more for every upgrade.
Tell your city council to grow more balls or start showing up like I did to demand competition. Sure enough guess who showed up to compete, Verizon and their friend FIOS.
Yeah... I'm sure the fact that you live in SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA had nothing to do with it. It was all about showing up to city council. Look... FIOS is more than welcome into my neighborhood. But lo' and behold I have no FIOS. I wonder why that is... maybe I should go complain to my city council some more that Verizon hasn't decided to wire my neighborhood yet. I'm sure Verizon is just waiting to bring it to my house but it's my city council which is stopping them./sarcasm
. Like for example, the amounts paid Halliburton and other corporations for shoddy work in the name of "defense".
Wait... Haliburton? The company the bush administration was touting as the answer to government waste. Haliburton the shining light of privatizing our military services and "saving money".
Haliburton... the poster child for "private industry can do what the government did only faster, cheaper and better"?
HALIBURTON!? YOU WANT TO USE HALIBURTON as an example of why the GOVERNMENT is bad at using money. I would say Haliburton has been an amazing demonstration of why we shouldn't be privatizing our government services.
The fact that one might do it less badly than another, does not mean that it was done well.
*blink* *blink*
So even if they're the world's best at it... they can still do it poorly? Ok. Well... can't argue with that definition then. I guess your definition of "poor" then is just whatever you disagree with. Which is to say it's not a definition it's an edict. I'll consult with you hence forth on all decisions of "poor" vs "good".
The reason most private organizations can outdo a govenrment agency is because they aren't required to service all customers at all times. When you can selectively offer services which are the most profitable it's easy to keep costs down. Only bring XYZ product to the people who can pay a premium and is easy to deliver to. The government has its hands tied (and rightfully so) because it's required to ensure service of its services to all parties equally. I'm sure a private organization would love to build a road system---that only connected highly profitable routes. And I'm sure they would do stupenously well financially.
RTFA. The data wasn't saying "The continent of Antartica is seeing increased ice." It says "At a base in Antartica we have seen an increase in ice."
Extrapolating an entire continent's data from one site is a strawman argument. The weather varries from mile to mile in my region. So much so it's described as one of the most complicated and unpredictable weather systems in the world. Taking data from one hill vs the next wouldn't even be a terribly great plan of attack.
They don't believe in the constitution. They believe in a twisted black and white reading of the original constitution to suit their interests. "The founding fathers said THIS. And they ALL AGREED! END OF STORY."
They don't correctly view the constitution as a compromise document between extremely divided factions which wrote into the constitution a means of advancing and improving it as the years go on. Ignoring all of the progress we've made as a people since then in our advancement of a nation and government. Ignoring the subsequent legislative, court and constitutional ammendments we've made to form a 'more perfect union'.
No let's just throw all of that away and go back and stick to the rough draft written 400 years ago and hold it up as our ultimate achievement. They make conservatives look like progressives and I for one will have nothing to do with it. Our government is evolving and changing to meet the needs of its people. Freedom from taxation and government? Fine. Do it like the rest of the country and write up an ammendment. Draft legislation. Convince the American People. Stop bitching that the nation isn't what the holy 'founding fathers' intended. They intended us to do better. They intended us to advance and debate. They intended us to use their starting point and then do one better. And that's what we've been doing.
My reply somehow got orphaned when the OP got modded into oblivion.
In context it wouldn't need the/sarcasm tags that are now required.
That's what I get for not quoting the parent in my post.
There's an idea for slashdot. Auto Quote. If something is modded 4/5 but the parent isn't visible then it should auto quote if the parent is less than 3 lines.
I've never beta tested a large application that was ready by the end of the second RC.
RC in my experience means it's the entire application in a shipping form that's still full of bugs.
Often a beta will be incomplete. It might not include the licenseing system. It might not include an installer. It might not include some sort of updating software. It might not include the documentation yet. But an RC means it's theoretically 'shippable' just buggy. Then they work out the lats of the bugs and make sure all of the support documentation and software doesn't break anything.
The last huge 'platform' software I tested was in RC for about 3 months before going gold. They were still fixing bugs as normal during that phase. (They are still fixing bugs and will probably fix bugs up until and after the next version ships). But the RC1 was a clear break from previous beta builds in that it was a DVD image with everything they intended to ship on the DVD.
To seemed like a perfectly logical and rational process to me.
As far as I'm concerned Windows 7 is ready to ship right now for my needs. I had some missing drivers which were problematic on an old Athlon XP but otherwise have had almost no problems. (Except for HD-DVD playback with PowerDVD).
I don't know of any company on the planet that would define Windows 7 as anything but a full point upgrade.
Windows 98SE was insignificant compared to Vista -> 7.
You're putting Microsoft under unreasonable expectations for an upgrade.
As to it being the "best ever" I would agree with that sentiment. It's funny that so many people keep complaining that 7 is just a "service pack" when Vista actually is still getting service packs. Let's compare the two shall we? Take a look at Vista's SP1 and SP2. Now compare that to the changelog for Winodws 7. You might see a different focus where Service Packs SERVICE THE APPLICATION and windows 7 ADDs new features... almost like it's a new product or something. Weird huh.
Since when have service packs been expected too add hundreds of new features and not just fix bugs? By that definition no company should ever release a new product and every new version is just a service pack.
Slashdot Mirror
I've got a tx1 and I love it. While watching TV if I get an instant message I just reach over and touch the flashing icon for the chat window and voila! I can view the IM or easily check my email all without needing to actually try and awkwardly use the laptop off to the side.
Then you didn't install Vista Ultimate.
Vista ultimate automatically enables all of the touchscreen stuff (onscreen keyboard, check box selection etc.)
It's actually a bit annoying.
Yeah I expect "The Year of Good Enough Hardware" will coincide with the 10th anniversary of the "Year of Linux on the Desktop".
We didn't need fast computers for everyday computing and then we started indexing the entire hard drive.
We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we started watching YouTube h264.
We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we wanted to be able to preview documents without opening them.
We didn't need fast computers for everyday use and then we wanted to be able to...
The list goes on and on.
Perhaps something like a linked article!
Fuckwit.
Except the only "retailer" mentioned in the story was sony. And to me Sony is nothing more than a distributor not a retailer.
He talks about hypotheticals in the article. "If game companies were to start selling online then they would be teaching their consumers that there is an easier way."
But from what I've seen Game Retailers seem to feel that way already and are content to slowly fade into oblivion.
So as I said before. It's a pretty misleading headline to imply that Game Retailers are actively working to right now to undermine their business with online sales--since the only example provided was the Microsoft/Sony online store type arrangement.
How is it that "Game Retailers" are hurting "Themselves".
Shouldn't the headline read "Online Game Distributors killing Game Retailers"?
I haven't seen any actions on the Game Retailers part that is hurting themselves except for existing. I suppose you could argue they should have become what steam is. But that's passively letting yourself die out.
I've been to church 'once or twice'. Which is how I know that: Revenge (Capitol Punishment), War Mongering (Kill the Terrorists!), Intolerance (Kill the Fags!), Greed (Cut assistance to impoverished families!) and the other trappings of the modern American conservative movement are at odds with a man who disavowed wealth, taught humility and generosity.
If we were to really follow in Christ's steps we would be a bunch of hippy communists who give up everything we have to serve those most in need.
There's a terrible irony that the conservative movement has attached itself to the most inhumane and socially unconsciounable platforms while simultaneously claiming some sort of divine ordination.
Can you see Jesus waterboarding terrorists? Can you see Jesus cutting health insurance for children? Can you see Jesus denying a group of people the right to marry and interfering in state affairs? Can you see Jesus lobbying Pilot to pass laws to exclude a group of people from Roman Life? Can you see Jesus suggesting that we shouldn't talk to enemies? Can you see Jesus advocating toxic dumping and pollution because it's "not financially vaible to be stewards of the earth?". Can you see Jesus mocking the environmental movement for wanting to protect his creation? Can you see Jesus mocking doves and calling them "silly spineless liberals". Can you see Jesus wanting to have anything to do with Rush Limbaugh? Can you see Jesus wanting anything to do with Sean Hannity?
The conservatives have claimed God in the US. But if there is a Jesus and Lord then he's got to be pissed with what they're doing with his supposed endorsement.
Probably the same way everyone else does it. By buying hydro,nuclear, coal and wind during the night.
That is until we have a 'smart grid'.
Shhhh!
You clearly don't understand American Christianity.
In American Christianity God says:
"Be nice to your neighbor.* As defined by a lawyer so as to not get sued."
"Feed the poor.* But fight foodstamps and welfare tooth and nail."
"Store up your treasures in heaven not here on earth.* But if someone suggests that maybe you should pay higher taxes cry communism and theft."
"Do not lend to your neighbor and expect a return.* Unless he took out a mortage then he's irresponsible and had better pay back every penny!"
Jesus was practically a hippy.
I feel as if you threaten my liberty.
Can I put all of your friends on trial for treason too?
It's just more Ann Coulter bullshit.
Yeah just like Antonio Gonzales in the summary... oh wait...
What can the mooon offer us in asteroid survivability that the south pole can't?
At least there is an abundance of Oxygen.
If you want "the good of humanity" then you want nuclear power or space solar power to power our hydroponics systems.
That's all that we need to survive a massive asteroid impact. Lots of electricity that isn't reliant on the sun.
We can heat homes. Heat farms. Heat our structures. We can filter air. We can filter water. We can recycle phosphates and other fertilizers.
I can't possibly think of a scenario in which an underwater or arctic base wouldn't be superior to a moon base post impact (excpet if the base gets directly hit by the asteroid... in which case we should build 3.)
The biodome failed due to oxygen. That's not a problem on earth unless something truley bizzare happens.
Now that's not to say that one astronaut can't accomplish more in 3 days than a robot in months just that the whole "we need a space colony or we're all going to die" holds no weight in my head.
Same with the "We're going to over populate the planet." argument. You know... except again for antartica and the ocean. Two places we haven't even begun to colonize but have enough space that's far more inhabitable than mars.
If we go to space in mass my guess will be it'll be to mine heavy metals as we use up our copper etc.
I've found that suburbs tend to get highspeed pipes faster than cities. And cities tend to get pipes faster than rural areas.
FIOS is less than 12 miles from my house. They predict it might reach my neighborhood sometime in the next 5 years. At work less than 4 miles away Comcast is offering 40mbps for $110. Less than 300 yards away I could get 20/5 for $60. But everything in my neighborhood, west and south for 4 miles is limited to 6/1 for $50 or 4/1 for $60.
That's why I say "most". There are always nice pockets of highspeed coverage. Comcast being the best and most consistent I've found. But most people only have a crappy cable company which they can buy from especially if you factor in the rural population (which is almost most by themselves).
Southern California
Road Runner TWC, $63 15/2
FIOS 10/2, 20/5, 20/20 $10 more for every upgrade.
Tell your city council to grow more balls or start showing up like I did to demand competition.
Sure enough guess who showed up to compete, Verizon and their friend FIOS.
Yeah... I'm sure the fact that you live in SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA had nothing to do with it. It was all about showing up to city council. Look... FIOS is more than welcome into my neighborhood. But lo' and behold I have no FIOS. I wonder why that is... maybe I should go complain to my city council some more that Verizon hasn't decided to wire my neighborhood yet. I'm sure Verizon is just waiting to bring it to my house but it's my city council which is stopping them. /sarcasm
We're going to put a camera in your dorm room and floor bathroom to watch everything you do. But don't worry we'll delete it after 3 days.
*I don't actually have a problem with this logging. But you asked for a better metaphor. :D
. Like for example, the amounts paid Halliburton and other corporations for shoddy work in the name of "defense".
Wait... Haliburton? The company the bush administration was touting as the answer to government waste. Haliburton the shining light of privatizing our military services and "saving money".
Haliburton... the poster child for "private industry can do what the government did only faster, cheaper and better"?
HALIBURTON!? YOU WANT TO USE HALIBURTON as an example of why the GOVERNMENT is bad at using money. I would say Haliburton has been an amazing demonstration of why we shouldn't be privatizing our government services.
The fact that one might do it less badly than another, does not mean that it was done well.
*blink* *blink*
So even if they're the world's best at it... they can still do it poorly? Ok. Well... can't argue with that definition then. I guess your definition of "poor" then is just whatever you disagree with. Which is to say it's not a definition it's an edict. I'll consult with you hence forth on all decisions of "poor" vs "good".
The reason most private organizations can outdo a govenrment agency is because they aren't required to service all customers at all times. When you can selectively offer services which are the most profitable it's easy to keep costs down. Only bring XYZ product to the people who can pay a premium and is easy to deliver to. The government has its hands tied (and rightfully so) because it's required to ensure service of its services to all parties equally. I'm sure a private organization would love to build a road system---that only connected highly profitable routes. And I'm sure they would do stupenously well financially.
RTFA. The data wasn't saying "The continent of Antartica is seeing increased ice." It says "At a base in Antartica we have seen an increase in ice."
Extrapolating an entire continent's data from one site is a strawman argument. The weather varries from mile to mile in my region. So much so it's described as one of the most complicated and unpredictable weather systems in the world. Taking data from one hill vs the next wouldn't even be a terribly great plan of attack.
They don't believe in the constitution. They believe in a twisted black and white reading of the original constitution to suit their interests. "The founding fathers said THIS. And they ALL AGREED! END OF STORY."
They don't correctly view the constitution as a compromise document between extremely divided factions which wrote into the constitution a means of advancing and improving it as the years go on. Ignoring all of the progress we've made as a people since then in our advancement of a nation and government. Ignoring the subsequent legislative, court and constitutional ammendments we've made to form a 'more perfect union'.
No let's just throw all of that away and go back and stick to the rough draft written 400 years ago and hold it up as our ultimate achievement. They make conservatives look like progressives and I for one will have nothing to do with it. Our government is evolving and changing to meet the needs of its people. Freedom from taxation and government? Fine. Do it like the rest of the country and write up an ammendment. Draft legislation. Convince the American People. Stop bitching that the nation isn't what the holy 'founding fathers' intended. They intended us to do better. They intended us to advance and debate. They intended us to use their starting point and then do one better. And that's what we've been doing.
Just edit your post.
Ha! Now wouldn't that be great!
Oh my... now I'm getting modded into oblivion too. The OP was so trollish it's even spilling over into my post! :D
My reply somehow got orphaned when the OP got modded into oblivion.
In context it wouldn't need the /sarcasm tags that are now required.
That's what I get for not quoting the parent in my post.
There's an idea for slashdot. Auto Quote. If something is modded 4/5 but the parent isn't visible then it should auto quote if the parent is less than 3 lines.
Actually yes they did. The first OSX was such a fuming pile of a turd that the first OSX upgrade was free.
But the first OSX made Vista's problems look like first day of school jitters.
Why should Vista owners feel they deserve a free upgrade? Didn't they install SP1? That's their free upgrade.
I've never beta tested a large application that was ready by the end of the second RC.
RC in my experience means it's the entire application in a shipping form that's still full of bugs.
Often a beta will be incomplete. It might not include the licenseing system. It might not include an installer. It might not include some sort of updating software. It might not include the documentation yet. But an RC means it's theoretically 'shippable' just buggy. Then they work out the lats of the bugs and make sure all of the support documentation and software doesn't break anything.
The last huge 'platform' software I tested was in RC for about 3 months before going gold. They were still fixing bugs as normal during that phase. (They are still fixing bugs and will probably fix bugs up until and after the next version ships). But the RC1 was a clear break from previous beta builds in that it was a DVD image with everything they intended to ship on the DVD.
To seemed like a perfectly logical and rational process to me.
As far as I'm concerned Windows 7 is ready to ship right now for my needs. I had some missing drivers which were problematic on an old Athlon XP but otherwise have had almost no problems. (Except for HD-DVD playback with PowerDVD).
Uhhh... yeah... Redmond the only place that offers its paying premium customers early access to its products and services before the general public.
I don't know of any company on the planet that would define Windows 7 as anything but a full point upgrade.
Windows 98SE was insignificant compared to Vista -> 7.
You're putting Microsoft under unreasonable expectations for an upgrade.
As to it being the "best ever" I would agree with that sentiment. It's funny that so many people keep complaining that 7 is just a "service pack" when Vista actually is still getting service packs. Let's compare the two shall we? Take a look at Vista's SP1 and SP2. Now compare that to the changelog for Winodws 7. You might see a different focus where Service Packs SERVICE THE APPLICATION and windows 7 ADDs new features... almost like it's a new product or something. Weird huh.
Since when have service packs been expected too add hundreds of new features and not just fix bugs? By that definition no company should ever release a new product and every new version is just a service pack.