Showing Jesus in a negative light is nothing new. Pretty much all that happens is a small group of uber-consertive Christians get their panties in a twist, and the rest of them just shrug and continue on with their lives. You won't get hit with a prison sentence for burning a depiction of Jesus. And I've seen much much worse than a burning Jesus.
I can't say I've ever had UAC pop up more than once for a certain app or op. I wonder if it has problems if a process launches other processes? I know that I encountered problems with Macromedia installers on a Windows XP box using "Run As..." (which UAC is probably using at least partially), because the installer would launch other installers in such a way that the permissions for the new process dropped back down to user level.
I think there should definitely be a way to flag programs as "Don't show me UAC for this, just elevate." Maybe a check box on the UAC popup? But then again, there might be security issues there that I'm not seeing.
Actually I like it because it manages to be more responsive on my machine than XP, despite what people say about the performance. UAC is actually a good idea too, despite the panning by Slashdot... its basically sudo. Oh and before you mention it, no I don't find it annoying. I rarely see the popups. Maybe once a week.
And I didn't pay for it either. I got it through MSDN.
But no, its not for everyone. Mine is probably a rare case, and the drivers are immature. Its not a good idea for the average user to switch right now. And its definitely not worth paying for it.
It was on by default for me, but I had the Ultimate edition. I believe Vista will grade your computer based on its hardware and if its too low, then it will disable Aero by default.
Actually UAC isn't really idiotic, and it doesn't solve the problem in a way thats appreciably different than sudo. It basically does the same thing. The administrator account actually runs as a user, and the UAC will raise it up to administrator for certain tasks.
The thing with UAC is it shows all the security problems, in terms of ACLs and required permissions, that exist in Windows today. People find UAC annoying because they're using software which requires admininistrator privileges. They find it annoying because Windows requires admin privileges for the entire control panel, instead of making permissions more granular, and giving the user some control over his or her own settings. They find it annoying because their ACLs for files and folders are set up wrong.
In my uses of Vista, I see UAC pop ups in three instances: when I'm in the control panel, when I'm installing software, and when I'm running poorly coded software that assumes administrator-level privileges.
So I think its disingenuous to pan UAC when people should really be worried about the Windows security settings that are causing all these "UAC issues."
I wonder if anyone has told these guys that the idea of an uncrackable DRM scheme is fundamentally flawed. Encryption is about A sending information that B can't read, but C can. In DRM, B and C are the same person.
You're getting off track. We're not discussing whether or not their actions are evil. We're discussing whether they're investing in solar to bury it or in order to bring it to a viable means of energy production. My point is that the board room members aren't villains from "Captain Planet." They don't sit around going "MWA HA HA HA! Lets kill off solar! Its good for the planet, thus doing so would be EVIL! And we're EVIL! MWA HA HA!" If they're attempting to kill off solar, it would be done so in order to make profit, since thats their goal.
I then go on further to say that global warming, peak oil, and other various problems with oil as an energy source are starting to gain a lot of focus by the populace at large. I theorize that the oil company executives see where the tides are turning, and are investing in solar to maintain their profits when the tides finally turn. I don't see them sinking R and D money into solar just to ignore a possible revenue stream, especially since investing that money in politicians could just as easily solve the whole "solar problem."
Of course, other posters pointed out that they may have a short-term view, which may be the case. Its all speculation, unless you know someone very high in the decision making process at one of these companies.
At any rate, I'm certainly not suggesting that the oil companies are gee-golly our best friends, nor am I suggesting that doing evil to make money is a-ok.
I remember hearing here on slashdot that a lot of the energy companies actually recognize the fact of global warming. That, combined with the dual threat of peak oil, and they probably see the writing on the wall. To that effect, they're probably looking for ways to maintain their bottom line. Corporations are many things, but they aren't evil just for the heck of it. They're in it for profit.
And a while back we had another story with an Asian kid being suspended/expelled for writing some stuff. I'm sensing a trend. Asians are the Arabs of 2007 I guess.
I guess I'm not the only one who saw that the kid was Chinese-American and went "A ha! So thats why!" Its sad, but I think the fact that the kid was Asian like the VT shooter had a lot to do with why they overreacted.
Its sad in this day and age to find out that small-minded simpletons can pull off crap like this, even if its just banning an innocent kid from his school.
For a gaming system? How well it plays games. Basically, how well it performs the tasks it was created for.
Yes its more powerful in that context, but thats not what I was arguing. I was arguing that you can't extrapolate the numbers out to say that, overall, the PS3 is 20 times more powerful than the PC, which is what it seemed like the top poster was trying to do.
I doubt that the PS3 could beat a Core 2 Duo in a highly branching area, like AI.
Look I love my Wii, but the PS2-GameCube gab is a lot smaller than the PS3-Wii gap, graphics wise. It may not matter now, but can we say the same thing in 2 or 3 years? And limited processing power doesn't just effect graphics. You're also looking at weaker AI, less enemies, less physics, etc.
I think Wii will do well, and it was worth the $250, but I'm doubtful of its staying power.
Nintendo was fined for price fixing, and they generally had bad relationships with their developers back in the SNES days. It seems like Nintendo has largely reformed, though.
Seconded. Sega sunk their reputation by rapid-fire releasing addons for the Genesis, then screwing releasing the Saturn shortly thereafter. Saturn was a 2D oriented system in a transition to 3d. Yes it could do 3d, but it was easier for Playstation. The main result was Saturn not doing well, and that reputation carried over to the Dreamcast. No, Sony marketing didn't help, but the Dreamcast was already in trouble by the time it was announced.
And yes, I am a Dreamcast owner. Its an awesome system, and its a shame it died. What little there was for it was great.
As far as WD goes, Sony's anal stance towards 2d game pisses me off to no end. Looking back, however, WD wasn't all that great of a company in the first place. They took a long time to translate, and often decided to put in jokes where they weren't warranted.
Plus, WD has always had tension with game management. They left Sega for Sony partly because of personal disputes between Victor Ireland and Sega management (and made no secret about this).
And, as Pluvius says, Japanese companies have been porting games a lot more since the Playstation days. Working Designs existed during a time when a lot of great Japanese games didn't make it over simply because the companies didn't feel that they had an audience in America. Thats not really the case anymore. We get most of Japan's AAA material these days.
120 units is a lot more than they shipped to American stores though. Around these parts, stores got between 20 and 30. Although one Circuit City in the 'burbs got 100.
Thats not surprising, considering cell is specifically designed to excel at the sort of calculations involved with protein folding. Its not indicative of the overall power of the system, or how well that power relates to a PC at all. Saying that a PS3 has 20x the performance of a Windows PC based on these numbers is ridiculous.
Thats the whole point of the RIAA. Its a cover organization for its member labels. It can go around being all sue happy, and it gets the blame instead of the member corporations.
Well, I have a friend whos working on Uncharted, and basically, yeah they will replicate data sometimes to allow them to stream it all in one chunk. The less seeking the BDROM has to do, the more bandwidth they can get out of it. Which is not to say that they're primarily using the extra space for that. A lot of it is filled up by extra texture maps and higher resolution source material.
Yeah I agree. A port would make a lot of business sense. And Square is on the record stating that they want to broaden support to keep a single player dominating, like the last two console generations. A FF port would definately meet that strategy.
Slashdot Mirror
Showing Jesus in a negative light is nothing new. Pretty much all that happens is a small group of uber-consertive Christians get their panties in a twist, and the rest of them just shrug and continue on with their lives. You won't get hit with a prison sentence for burning a depiction of Jesus. And I've seen much much worse than a burning Jesus.
Through ones place of employment.
I can't say I've ever had UAC pop up more than once for a certain app or op. I wonder if it has problems if a process launches other processes? I know that I encountered problems with Macromedia installers on a Windows XP box using "Run As..." (which UAC is probably using at least partially), because the installer would launch other installers in such a way that the permissions for the new process dropped back down to user level.
I think there should definitely be a way to flag programs as "Don't show me UAC for this, just elevate." Maybe a check box on the UAC popup? But then again, there might be security issues there that I'm not seeing.
Beats the heck out of my AMD X2 4200 and GeForce 7800 GT, so I think we can write this down to a problem with Microsoft's detection code.
Actually I like it because it manages to be more responsive on my machine than XP, despite what people say about the performance. UAC is actually a good idea too, despite the panning by Slashdot... its basically sudo. Oh and before you mention it, no I don't find it annoying. I rarely see the popups. Maybe once a week.
And I didn't pay for it either. I got it through MSDN.
But no, its not for everyone. Mine is probably a rare case, and the drivers are immature. Its not a good idea for the average user to switch right now. And its definitely not worth paying for it.
I actually sorta like Vista, but I still tell people not to buy it. Too new, drivers are immature, and too pricey for too little improvement.
It was on by default for me, but I had the Ultimate edition. I believe Vista will grade your computer based on its hardware and if its too low, then it will disable Aero by default.
Actually UAC isn't really idiotic, and it doesn't solve the problem in a way thats appreciably different than sudo. It basically does the same thing. The administrator account actually runs as a user, and the UAC will raise it up to administrator for certain tasks.
The thing with UAC is it shows all the security problems, in terms of ACLs and required permissions, that exist in Windows today. People find UAC annoying because they're using software which requires admininistrator privileges. They find it annoying because Windows requires admin privileges for the entire control panel, instead of making permissions more granular, and giving the user some control over his or her own settings. They find it annoying because their ACLs for files and folders are set up wrong.
In my uses of Vista, I see UAC pop ups in three instances: when I'm in the control panel, when I'm installing software, and when I'm running poorly coded software that assumes administrator-level privileges.
So I think its disingenuous to pan UAC when people should really be worried about the Windows security settings that are causing all these "UAC issues."
I wonder if anyone has told these guys that the idea of an uncrackable DRM scheme is fundamentally flawed. Encryption is about A sending information that B can't read, but C can. In DRM, B and C are the same person.
You're getting off track. We're not discussing whether or not their actions are evil. We're discussing whether they're investing in solar to bury it or in order to bring it to a viable means of energy production. My point is that the board room members aren't villains from "Captain Planet." They don't sit around going "MWA HA HA HA! Lets kill off solar! Its good for the planet, thus doing so would be EVIL! And we're EVIL! MWA HA HA!" If they're attempting to kill off solar, it would be done so in order to make profit, since thats their goal.
I then go on further to say that global warming, peak oil, and other various problems with oil as an energy source are starting to gain a lot of focus by the populace at large. I theorize that the oil company executives see where the tides are turning, and are investing in solar to maintain their profits when the tides finally turn. I don't see them sinking R and D money into solar just to ignore a possible revenue stream, especially since investing that money in politicians could just as easily solve the whole "solar problem."
Of course, other posters pointed out that they may have a short-term view, which may be the case. Its all speculation, unless you know someone very high in the decision making process at one of these companies.
At any rate, I'm certainly not suggesting that the oil companies are gee-golly our best friends, nor am I suggesting that doing evil to make money is a-ok.
Reading comprehension FTW.
I remember hearing here on slashdot that a lot of the energy companies actually recognize the fact of global warming. That, combined with the dual threat of peak oil, and they probably see the writing on the wall. To that effect, they're probably looking for ways to maintain their bottom line. Corporations are many things, but they aren't evil just for the heck of it. They're in it for profit.
It obviously means that the developers are secret heros with super spider powers.
And a while back we had another story with an Asian kid being suspended/expelled for writing some stuff. I'm sensing a trend. Asians are the Arabs of 2007 I guess.
Racism is friggen stupid.
I guess I'm not the only one who saw that the kid was Chinese-American and went "A ha! So thats why!" Its sad, but I think the fact that the kid was Asian like the VT shooter had a lot to do with why they overreacted.
Its sad in this day and age to find out that small-minded simpletons can pull off crap like this, even if its just banning an innocent kid from his school.
You forgot Uncharted by Naughty Dog.
For a gaming system? How well it plays games. Basically, how well it performs the tasks it was created for.
Yes its more powerful in that context, but thats not what I was arguing. I was arguing that you can't extrapolate the numbers out to say that, overall, the PS3 is 20 times more powerful than the PC, which is what it seemed like the top poster was trying to do.
I doubt that the PS3 could beat a Core 2 Duo in a highly branching area, like AI.
Look I love my Wii, but the PS2-GameCube gab is a lot smaller than the PS3-Wii gap, graphics wise. It may not matter now, but can we say the same thing in 2 or 3 years? And limited processing power doesn't just effect graphics. You're also looking at weaker AI, less enemies, less physics, etc.
I think Wii will do well, and it was worth the $250, but I'm doubtful of its staying power.
Nintendo was fined for price fixing, and they generally had bad relationships with their developers back in the SNES days. It seems like Nintendo has largely reformed, though.
Seconded. Sega sunk their reputation by rapid-fire releasing addons for the Genesis, then screwing releasing the Saturn shortly thereafter. Saturn was a 2D oriented system in a transition to 3d. Yes it could do 3d, but it was easier for Playstation. The main result was Saturn not doing well, and that reputation carried over to the Dreamcast. No, Sony marketing didn't help, but the Dreamcast was already in trouble by the time it was announced.
And yes, I am a Dreamcast owner. Its an awesome system, and its a shame it died. What little there was for it was great.
As far as WD goes, Sony's anal stance towards 2d game pisses me off to no end. Looking back, however, WD wasn't all that great of a company in the first place. They took a long time to translate, and often decided to put in jokes where they weren't warranted.
Plus, WD has always had tension with game management. They left Sega for Sony partly because of personal disputes between Victor Ireland and Sega management (and made no secret about this).
And, as Pluvius says, Japanese companies have been porting games a lot more since the Playstation days. Working Designs existed during a time when a lot of great Japanese games didn't make it over simply because the companies didn't feel that they had an audience in America. Thats not really the case anymore. We get most of Japan's AAA material these days.
Well I was talking launch numbers, but yes, I agree mostly with what you've said. Although based on last month's NDP numbers, 360 was outselling PS3.
120 units is a lot more than they shipped to American stores though. Around these parts, stores got between 20 and 30. Although one Circuit City in the 'burbs got 100.
Thats not surprising, considering cell is specifically designed to excel at the sort of calculations involved with protein folding. Its not indicative of the overall power of the system, or how well that power relates to a PC at all. Saying that a PS3 has 20x the performance of a Windows PC based on these numbers is ridiculous.
Thats the whole point of the RIAA. Its a cover organization for its member labels. It can go around being all sue happy, and it gets the blame instead of the member corporations.
Well, I have a friend whos working on Uncharted, and basically, yeah they will replicate data sometimes to allow them to stream it all in one chunk. The less seeking the BDROM has to do, the more bandwidth they can get out of it. Which is not to say that they're primarily using the extra space for that. A lot of it is filled up by extra texture maps and higher resolution source material.
Yeah I agree. A port would make a lot of business sense. And Square is on the record stating that they want to broaden support to keep a single player dominating, like the last two console generations. A FF port would definately meet that strategy.