Microsoft and Intel did a lot to condition people to stick with what they have. Microsoft taught people not to buy with it's multiple delays of Vista AND with service packs that rarely add any obvious functionality and even slow a system down (certainly Service Pack 2 did). Throw in DRM and all that stuff and who is genuinely excited about Vista finally coming out? A major theme with Vista is that a persons computer probably cant run it and people are confused as to just what will run Vista. So its better to wait things out.
Intel contributed to this sluggish market with its MarketBurst..erm.. NetBurst architecture
that turned PC's into toasters. It's been obvious for awhile that Intel cpu's were sluggish yet hot and wasteful. Intel had to break down their marketing paradigm based on faster ghz. They had a lot of brand clarity in the computer market and they had to purposely destroy that to use confusion and obfuscation to hide the Pentiums inferiority and liabilities.
While Intel and Microsoft were self destructing more and more people were getting broadband and finding their computers were doing more without having to buy an upgrade. People have been buying a lot more MP3 players and cameras etc.
I waited over a year to get a new system because I wanted a Conroe Core 2 Duo. I finally had a reason to upgrade since Core 2 Duo gave a real performance boost without becoming a wasteful furnace. With Core 2 Duo I fly through Windows Movie Maker tasks compared to my Pentium 4, 1.8 but the C2D has the same wattage profile as the Pentium 4 1.8.
Unlike most people though I kept reading about hardware developments. I don't think a lot of people know Core 2 Duo from Dual Core. Throw in all the HDCP, Direct X 10 etc. convolutions and the main message a lot of people pick out is "don't buy". They have had that message for awhile now and they have learned not buying a new computer isn't so bad.
Right now things like High Def and fiber optics with movies downloaded on line seem to be interesting to people but all the fighting and confusion over standards and "rights management" seem to work against the market yet again.
For myself, I am happy because I have seen what high def camcorders can do (I haven't bought yet because of the lack of drives for editing etc.) my area has Verizon FIOS, and I have a new E6600 Core 2 Duo which gets me online almost immediately while crusing through apps. I am even happy with my new OEM Windows Media Center OS (110 USD) and really dont want anything to do with Vista for at least a year or so - if at all.
All-in-all I think it's a great time to upgrade a desktop. The hardware innovations are there and the OS situation isn't going to be "clear" in January When Vista comes out. The cost of things like new Direct X 10 cards, together with the bugs WE KNOW will be in Vista (and drivers from other hardware makers) makes this a good time to upgrade things like Desktops. Notebooks are another story since they seem to have a way to go still to be able to use Vista comfortably without costing 2 or 3 grand US.
I would agree computers dont need more power for e-mails and web browsing etc. But using Windows Movie Maker with a new Core 2 Duo instead of a Pentium 4 1.8 makes a world of difference. The fact that I can do more with Core 2 Duo while not using up all the power of a Pentium 4 makes Core 2 Duo a very worthwhile upgrade right now. I know "Quad Core" is coming out but they will be three times as expensive as an E6600. Even Intel has said dual core is where it will be at for awhile. If you build your own system you can have a nice Core 2 Duo system for around 1000 USD. I don't want Vista right away so I didnt mind paying 100 USD for Media Center Edition (OEM @ Newegg).
It's a power hungry for my psu - but I think with some jumper cables I can hook it up to the service panel in the basement. It will add some clutter down there, but at least when winter comes I can put my wet shoes next to the computer instead of the furnace.
Vaccinations have also been suspected as a cause for the increase in Autism. I would be curious to know about any correlation between economic standards (cable TV) and health care (child vaccinations).
I understand that for many people vaccinations are thought to be beyond question but when I listen to professionals who suspect vaccinations as a cause of autism I find they make a compelling argument. Some of my agreement comes from experiences I had being physically ill myself.
I was once treated with antibiotics for several years continuously(for Lyme disease that went undiagnosed for 2 years). I was surprised to learn what a stressed immune system can do to cognition. I would have cyclic herxheimer reactions that lasted for weeks. During those weeks I had many times where people could speak to me and I could see their lips moving but not be able to "unscramble" what they were saying. Dyslexic reversals were common. I could drive through red lights, not recognize old friends, lose all sense of time. I was seriously out-of-synch with what anyone would consider "normal perception"
Now I was 25 when all this hit me (and lasted for 5 years). If I had been a child I am sure I would have been developmentally disabled.
I think many people have a discrete and mechanical view of the immune system. As if all that activity takes place separate from the mind. I can tell you an immune system under stress/off-balance can cause powerful changes in cognition etc.
One aspect of the recent rise in autism cases is the rise in "regressive autism" - the manifestations of which some professional have linked to vaccines. The segment of children with "regressive autism," the form where children develop normally for a period of time then lose skills and sink into autism, most commonly at 18-24 months of age, is increasing at a phenomenal rate. I am seeing several children in the same family affected, including in the last week four cases of "autistic regression" developing in four-year-old children after their MMR and DPT vaccination. In the past, this was unheard of."
This testimony was given by Mary Megson, MD on April 6, 2000 at Senate hearings on autism and vaccinations.
In most objectively measured reviews I see, Western Digital is always near the top more than any other maker. Newegg and other consumer review sites are not the best you can do. Right now at Newegg I am watching a lot of AMD fanboys going out of their way to slug the new Core 2 Duo cpu's and mobos. It takes all kinds..
Lol - my thoughts exactly. Just this week I was reading an article about video cards that were measured for temperature and plenty of cards were going to or over 200 degrees F. The first quad core will double the wattage of the Core 2 Duo and cost 1000 USD. But Intel people have said in interviews that dual core is the focus for now so even they arent pushing the news quads too hard at the mo. Upgrades for power just dont look appealing like a few years ago. Its beautiful to see Core 2 Duo do more with less. It would be nice to see that trend continue
"That said, if Intel can create a quad-core that performs very well and doesn't get too hot, I could care less if it's four cores on one die, 2 glued dual-core, or four single-core dies glued together, or a legion of microscopic gremlins that are really good at math."
True of course. When I first wrote post I was mindful of a recent Tom's Hardware review that had the quad core doubling up in watts used (compared to Core 2 Duo)and that will sell for around 1000 USD.
Core 2 Duo was such an exciting thing to see come around. Looking back on the Pentiums and all the heat and reduced efficiency for that sake of selling the MHz (and then the whooping AMD dished out on Intel) and you have to wonder what the heck went wrong. A Pentium 4 1.8 was the last cpu I would buy from Intel. A long time ago people were urging Intel to see the Pentium M as a way to the future.
I just hope Intel doesn't go wild pushing cores for the sake of pushing cores along with the the video card makers making bigger and more power hungry toasters. To be fair though, Intel people have said dual core is where the action will be for a while and pretty much de-emphaiszed the first quad cores.
"Paul Otellini, Intel's president and CEO, kicked off this season's IDF by coining the phrase "It's what's inside that counts", and spoke about why processing power matters again"
But then this in another article covering the same event:
"Otellini briefly responded to concerns that Intel's first quad-core packages are simply "glued-together" dual-core processors while AMD is working on a native, single-die quad-core chip. "So what?," said Otellini, adding, "The public doesn't care what's inside a processor."
In yet another article in Ars Technica we read that Intel is look to an 80 core chip. I like the Core 2 Duo a lot but I hope the Intel megahertz fixation isn't just going to become a "core" fixation .
Robert Moses built a lot of bridges and roads around New york hoping to relieve congestion but it had the counter-intuitive effect of creating more traffic. I hope all the increases in size and power of computers doesnt just bring more garbage. With all the legacy code bloat, and things like video cards that get hot as toasters and power supplies that waste energy (the Google thing) I think computing could use a few reductions instead of increases. In that regard it's nice to see the Core 2 Duo bring down the wattage.
When I bought my first ATI All-In-Wonder video card I was warned about buggy drivers and just scoffed at the notion. I could not see how a major vid card maker could possibly have bad drivers with any frequency. I spent more time trying to fix ATI bugs than anything XP ever did. And lots and lots of other people can tell you the same thing.
I remember a lawyer who posted on Slashdot last year. He said in civil cases a person a person doesn't need to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Just being "probably guilty" was enough. That answered questions from people who thought they could just hide or destroy their hard drive with the assumption that there would then be no evidence. Under civil laws it wouldn't matter. If their was an ISP number found and an uploaded file that was "probably guilty" right there. They would hardly need the hard drive. The lawyer said people who still tried to play things tough and be uncooperative would most likely just be cited for contempt and worsen their condition.
I find more and more sellers are phony. They can even have a high "positive" rating and they burn you. There are so many bogus electronic sales its amazing. Laptop auctions come with emails inviting people to make end around offer. A Google search shows email addy on long list of phonies kept by private groups concerned with ebay fraud. You can find lots of interesting items with no bidders even in the last minutes. Why? Because people know they are phony.
I got burned twice on ebay for cheap DVD's for sale by sellers with high positive ratings. Then I get notices from ebay warning me about seller. Oh it seems people, can hack/fake accounts. Haha too late for me. Getting burned gets almost no action from ebay, Paypal etc. Ebay went from interesting auction to flea market full of high prices, phony hustlers and junk. A friend bought big collection of all Buffy DVD sets. They were meant to be in excellent condtion. Then big box of broken plastic arrives and seller listing is gone. Lots of people figured out the deal and ebay. Amazon is much better.
"How Amazon and Google are taking eBay's Business"
http://slashdot.org/articles/05/06/22/2154201.shtm l
My hometown of Peekskill New york got hit with a meteorite back in the 90's. It crashed through the back of an old junker car belonging to 17 year old girl. She was in tears. Turned out she got about 80,000 USD for the rock and the car. It was only known car to be hit. The car and meteorite went on display in Museum Of Natural History and other museums around the world. It was also filmed going across sky in Washington. Every year around this time I hope for my car to get hit. A view of meteor in sky before it hit is on this cool meteor site:
AOL was just in the news over the weekend in an article about a woman who can't get AOL to cancel her dead fathers account. What an awful company. Lets not forget AOL was also the company that had the employee who sold a few hundred thousand credit card numbers. I don't think I would even use the free stuff they are now advertising. They probably have rootkits at the ready - easily detectable ones at that - just to really implode in grand style.
As the Marquis de Talleyrand said after losing a chess game. ""It is worse than a crime, it is a blunder!"
Even dead people can't escape AOL
By David Sheets ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH 08/04/2006
Maxine Gauthier doesn't own a computer. She doesn't know the first thing about Web browsing or sending e-mail. She's not even sure where to find a computer's "on" button, as she describes it.
Yet for the past nine months, she has been fighting one of the most persistent and some say irritating institutions in cyberspace: AOL, formerly known as America Online.
"They just haven't wanted to let go," the 55-year-old St. Louisan said. "I don't think they'll ever really let go."
The problem? An AOL account once held by Gauthier's late father still showed billing charges accumulating against it. The account had been dormant for months; the credit card he used for it was inactive at least as long.
Nevertheless, AOL kept charging $25.90 each month for dial-up online access. Late fees for non-payment accumulated on the credit card, too.
I had AOL dial-up for one year. I had AOL for Broadband for 2 years. I finally got tired of FORCED updates I didn't want and endless ghetto content. When I called to end all my services from AOL I was raked over coals. I was interrogated (and I mean interrogated) about my reasons for wanting to end service. I said I just wanted to end my service. The interrogation contiuned and I got pressed for my adware/spyware software usage. I was now fighting with the AOL rep to get my service ended. Despite my very obvious desire to end my service my rep proceeded to give instructions for downloading some browser.
At that point I reminded my rep that the Attorney General in my state (NY) had already filed a case against AOL for doing exactly what she was doing then (strong arming people and not allowing them to cancel their services when asked). I told her I would call the AG with a compliant and use her name. At that point she finally cancelled my services.
AOL has a well established record of legal violations and disgraceful business tactics (not to mention dumb ones). The people who willfully and knowingly performed these things are sleaze bags (and it seems AOL had LOTS of them). I find a lot of things deserve compassion in the world but f00kin AOL and its army of creep employees aint one of them.
A lot of movies are like pinball games where a story sort of bangs around with a lot of lights and noises going off. It's all well and good to blame execs who focus on the bottom line and focus on making safe profits for their 100 million investment. I just don't think that 100 million is even needed to start with. I think Hollywood and it's audiences are way too impressed with technological wizbang. Even the amount of superfluous noise in movies is becoming a burden.
Some people say "oh well there have always been bad movies and each year there are still the good ones and it's not accurate to focus on the failures". I can't agree if that "failure" cost 100 or 200 million. "Donnie Darko" cost around 4 million and was written and made by a kid basically. If the movie has been given the "safe" blockbuster treatment it would have been a pile of soul less noise and technological gimmicks -all very expensive - and unnecessary. Even a successful movie like "Titanic" had another 15-20 minutes of fancy crap that could have been cut to no bad effect.
I swear the more "realistic" they try to make these movies look and sound the phonier they seem. It all more heat than light and the sound pollution in films keeps me o put of the theatres
I think a lot of execs read a few books or take a few weekend seminars on screenwriting and they get very taken in by "formula". I remember when a weekend seminar with Robert McKee was all the rage. People learned things like "Inciting incident>progressive complications>conflict>crisis>resolution" and they thought they had the secret recipe. People even though dialogue hardly matters as long as the "structure" was there. Of course translating that formula into a visually engaging story was another matter. Heck even best selling books often bomb as films. I could write down a formula for meeting the perfect spouse but that doesn't mean I could easily translate it into a reality.
" agree with you that management is most likely to blame but for another reason. As projects like this become complex, it requires very good management to ensure that the important details are not overlooked. With as many problems as the Big Dig seemed to have before completion, it would seem that the management was not up to the task"
A problem with these municipal jobs is that there are too many chiefs and not enough Indians -except when their is a problem - then nobody wants to take control and/or make a tough decision. I am a contractor who learned to stay away from municipal prevailing wage jobs. There were too many regulations and hoops to jump through. The state, county and municipal agencies all have their "overseers" with all sorts of demands and criteria but they often conflict with each other as well as the other people such as architects and engineers etc.
However when a real need for guidance arises, or a decision needs to be made, many bosses and supervisors suddenly are hard to find and/or they defer to someone else who also defers to someone else etc. A project can easily get "finished" with many important and delicate details simply fudged or ignored (often seen in tandem with smaller, less significant details that got scrutinized to death at great cost). It's amazing to me more people don't get hurt or injured.
I work on construction jobs and have learned that many illegals from countries south of the border not only don't read English they don't read Spanish either. I can also say that while their capacity for physical labor is substantial, their lack of attention to finer details and "finishing skills" is a real liability. A lot of these guys are also often tired from many hours of overtime and are often a lot more compromised in their abilities than their enthusiasm would suggest.
"May 26, 2006 -- For several weeks Microsoft has been in discussions about a possible acquisition of online auctioneer eBay, The Post has learned. According to multiple sources close to the matter, Microsoft has considered buying eBay and merging it with its MSN portal - a deal that would give MSN and eBay considerable clout to take on Google. "
There must surely be more to this move threat of eBay's than meets the eye. On the simple face of things I think eBay refusing Google payments would be like eBay cutting off its nose to spite its face. Google is the "golden child" of the moment and has tremendous clout and cache. EBay is brimming with fraud and losing many of its best sellers to Amazon. Customers who get ripped of by bogus sellers get little help from eBay or PayPal and there is an increasing resentment against them. EBay to refusing Google payments would just paint it even more into a corner. Seeing eBay's threat against a Microsoft merger would make more sense - even if its still a bad idea.
Actually the Telco "monopoly" was busted up. The rest of what you say from there is convoluted. You make the Telcos an arm of government and them "not". I can see where the Telcos have their own ax to grind as well as the Google, Yahoo etc. but the Internet/web are growing so large and pervasive that old telecommunication structures and their economies will longer function realistically. Yet Net Neutrality and its beneficiaries try to keep them in place while they benefit.
My broadband connection with Verizon has doubled in speed the last 2 years while the cost has almost been cut in half. Telcos want more money but not from basic users, they want it from big commercial users who want to piggyback on Telco services and markets.
I understand your point when you mention ISP's over selling but I dont see where it means Yahoo etc. gets to offer free phone calls and undercut the very networks it needs.
When a massive hurricane causes thousands of dollars in damage to lines it's not Google that's coming to fix them. Yet this same Google(and Yahoo,Skype MSN etc.)wants to offer "free" phone calls over Telcos networks without any "commercial" rate for pricing. It's hardly fair that a Google can use a Telco network to take Telco business away and then scream "net neutrality" if Telcos seek a higher rate for web giants making looking to make millions without the overhead faced by networks.
I once a "Net Neutality" enthusiast but the more I learn about it the more it "un-neutral" it seems. Kudos to Google and Vin Serf for getting some people to think supporting Net Neutrality is good for the "little guy". To me its just looking more as a way for big Web companies to make money off the network maintainers backs.
Oh I know the Googles etc pay their use fees but they dont pay a commercial rate like most Telcos and power cos get to charge. Just because people pay rent on an apartment doesn't the renter can turn around and sublet the same apartment in a manner that's harmful to original renter. I can't rent a one bedroom apartment then rent it out to a dozen other people. This net neutrality just seems like a way of keeping a lopsided arrangement unfairly beneficial for the Googles.
I would add that Telco services also have a lot of taxes built in to their services that the Googles dont have yet. Governments have their hands pretty deep in Telco pockets. It's unrealistic to think governments and Telcos will just "back-off" for the sake neutrality and let the Googles make millions by providing Telco services without the overhead liabilities.
This Net Neutrality looks pretty lopsided to me. As much as I despise Telcos I can see their points.
Music Labels Once Wanted iPod Profit Percentage
on
The Cost of the iPod
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It was just last year that the music labels not only wanted to raise the price of downloadng music but they were talking about demanding a percentage of iPod sales. It would not be paranoid to suspect that the labels would use any iPod profit disclosures against them - and with some prejudice.
If Apple showed a 50% percent profit on iPod sales, labels could demand a percentage of that 50% without regard to how iPod sales cover losses in other areas. This article already shows a penchant for dividing iPod from Apple computer sales. In the event of label demands and/or legal actions Apple could end up getting hung with its own rope.
Of course Apple could always use a shell game to manipulate profits. How many Hollywood films ended-up not showing a profit after some "broader" accounting. Not providing info while also not shape shifting any books is probably a prudent to way to go even is it looks bad in a narrower context.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft and Intel did a lot to condition people to stick with what they have. Microsoft taught people not to buy with it's multiple delays of Vista AND with service packs that rarely add any obvious functionality and even slow a system down (certainly Service Pack 2 did). Throw in DRM and all that stuff and who is genuinely excited about Vista finally coming out? A major theme with Vista is that a persons computer probably cant run it and people are confused as to just what will run Vista. So its better to wait things out. Intel contributed to this sluggish market with its MarketBurst..erm.. NetBurst architecture that turned PC's into toasters. It's been obvious for awhile that Intel cpu's were sluggish yet hot and wasteful. Intel had to break down their marketing paradigm based on faster ghz. They had a lot of brand clarity in the computer market and they had to purposely destroy that to use confusion and obfuscation to hide the Pentiums inferiority and liabilities. While Intel and Microsoft were self destructing more and more people were getting broadband and finding their computers were doing more without having to buy an upgrade. People have been buying a lot more MP3 players and cameras etc. I waited over a year to get a new system because I wanted a Conroe Core 2 Duo. I finally had a reason to upgrade since Core 2 Duo gave a real performance boost without becoming a wasteful furnace. With Core 2 Duo I fly through Windows Movie Maker tasks compared to my Pentium 4, 1.8 but the C2D has the same wattage profile as the Pentium 4 1.8. Unlike most people though I kept reading about hardware developments. I don't think a lot of people know Core 2 Duo from Dual Core. Throw in all the HDCP, Direct X 10 etc. convolutions and the main message a lot of people pick out is "don't buy". They have had that message for awhile now and they have learned not buying a new computer isn't so bad. Right now things like High Def and fiber optics with movies downloaded on line seem to be interesting to people but all the fighting and confusion over standards and "rights management" seem to work against the market yet again. For myself, I am happy because I have seen what high def camcorders can do (I haven't bought yet because of the lack of drives for editing etc.) my area has Verizon FIOS, and I have a new E6600 Core 2 Duo which gets me online almost immediately while crusing through apps. I am even happy with my new OEM Windows Media Center OS (110 USD) and really dont want anything to do with Vista for at least a year or so - if at all. All-in-all I think it's a great time to upgrade a desktop. The hardware innovations are there and the OS situation isn't going to be "clear" in January When Vista comes out. The cost of things like new Direct X 10 cards, together with the bugs WE KNOW will be in Vista (and drivers from other hardware makers) makes this a good time to upgrade things like Desktops. Notebooks are another story since they seem to have a way to go still to be able to use Vista comfortably without costing 2 or 3 grand US.
I would agree computers dont need more power for e-mails and web browsing etc. But using Windows Movie Maker with a new Core 2 Duo instead of a Pentium 4 1.8 makes a world of difference. The fact that I can do more with Core 2 Duo while not using up all the power of a Pentium 4 makes Core 2 Duo a very worthwhile upgrade right now. I know "Quad Core" is coming out but they will be three times as expensive as an E6600. Even Intel has said dual core is where it will be at for awhile. If you build your own system you can have a nice Core 2 Duo system for around 1000 USD. I don't want Vista right away so I didnt mind paying 100 USD for Media Center Edition (OEM @ Newegg).
It's a power hungry for my psu - but I think with some jumper cables I can hook it up to the service panel in the basement. It will add some clutter down there, but at least when winter comes I can put my wet shoes next to the computer instead of the furnace.
Vaccinations have also been suspected as a cause for the increase in Autism. I would be curious to know about any correlation between economic standards (cable TV) and health care (child vaccinations).
. html
I understand that for many people vaccinations are thought to be beyond question but when I listen to professionals who suspect vaccinations as a cause of autism I find they make a compelling argument. Some of my agreement comes from experiences I had being physically ill myself.
I was once treated with antibiotics for several years continuously(for Lyme disease that went undiagnosed for 2 years). I was surprised to learn what a stressed immune system can do to cognition. I would have cyclic herxheimer reactions that lasted for weeks. During those weeks I had many times where people could speak to me and I could see their lips moving but not be able to "unscramble" what they were saying. Dyslexic reversals were common. I could drive through red lights, not recognize old friends, lose all sense of time. I was seriously out-of-synch with what anyone would consider "normal perception"
Now I was 25 when all this hit me (and lasted for 5 years). If I had been a child I am sure I would have been developmentally disabled.
I think many people have a discrete and mechanical view of the immune system. As if all that activity takes place separate from the mind. I can tell you an immune system under stress/off-balance can cause powerful changes in cognition etc.
One aspect of the recent rise in autism cases is the rise in "regressive autism" - the manifestations of which some professional have linked to vaccines.
The segment of children with "regressive autism," the form where children develop normally for a period of time then lose skills and sink into autism, most commonly at 18-24 months of age, is increasing at a phenomenal rate. I am seeing several children in the same family affected, including in the last week four cases of "autistic regression" developing in four-year-old children after their MMR and DPT vaccination. In the past, this was unheard of."
This testimony was given by Mary Megson, MD on April 6, 2000 at Senate hearings on autism and vaccinations.
http://www.westonaprice.org/moderndiseases/autism
Yeah I think there are a lot of politcal stories on weekends. They seem geared to generating more heat (arguments/clicks) that light.
I would have added proprietary memory media. I wont buy Sony cameras etc since I would have to use their memory media instead of what I already own.
In most objectively measured reviews I see, Western Digital is always near the top more than any other maker. Newegg and other consumer review sites are not the best you can do. Right now at Newegg I am watching a lot of AMD fanboys going out of their way to slug the new Core 2 Duo cpu's and mobos. It takes all kinds..
Lol - my thoughts exactly. Just this week I was reading an article about video cards that were measured for temperature and plenty of cards were going to or over 200 degrees F. The first quad core will double the wattage of the Core 2 Duo and cost 1000 USD. But Intel people have said in interviews that dual core is the focus for now so even they arent pushing the news quads too hard at the mo. Upgrades for power just dont look appealing like a few years ago. Its beautiful to see Core 2 Duo do more with less. It would be nice to see that trend continue
"That said, if Intel can create a quad-core that performs very well and doesn't get too hot, I could care less if it's four cores on one die, 2 glued dual-core, or four single-core dies glued together, or a legion of microscopic gremlins that are really good at math."
True of course. When I first wrote post I was mindful of a recent Tom's Hardware review that had the quad core doubling up in watts used (compared to Core 2 Duo)and that will sell for around 1000 USD.
Core 2 Duo was such an exciting thing to see come around. Looking back on the Pentiums and all the heat and reduced efficiency for that sake of selling the MHz (and then the whooping AMD dished out on Intel) and you have to wonder what the heck went wrong. A Pentium 4 1.8 was the last cpu I would buy from Intel. A long time ago people were urging Intel to see the Pentium M as a way to the future.
I just hope Intel doesn't go wild pushing cores for the sake of pushing cores along with the the video card makers making bigger and more power hungry toasters. To be fair though, Intel people have said dual core is where the action will be for a while and pretty much de-emphaiszed the first quad cores.
From the article:
a d_announcement/
0 .html
"Paul Otellini, Intel's president and CEO, kicked off this season's IDF by coining the phrase "It's what's inside that counts", and spoke about why processing power matters again"
But then this in another article covering the same event:
"Otellini briefly responded to concerns that Intel's first quad-core packages are simply "glued-together" dual-core processors while AMD is working on a native, single-die quad-core chip. "So what?," said Otellini, adding, "The public doesn't care what's inside a processor."
http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/09/26/intel_core_2_qu
In yet another article in Ars Technica we read that Intel is look to an 80 core chip. I like the Core 2 Duo a lot but I hope the Intel megahertz fixation isn't just going to become a "core" fixation .
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060926-784
Robert Moses built a lot of bridges and roads around New york hoping to relieve congestion but it had the counter-intuitive effect of creating more traffic. I hope all the increases in size and power of computers doesnt just bring more garbage. With all the legacy code bloat, and things like video cards that get hot as toasters and power supplies that waste energy (the Google thing) I think computing could use a few reductions instead of increases. In that regard it's nice to see the Core 2 Duo bring down the wattage.
When I bought my first ATI All-In-Wonder video card I was warned about buggy drivers and just scoffed at the notion. I could not see how a major vid card maker could possibly have bad drivers with any frequency. I spent more time trying to fix ATI bugs than anything XP ever did. And lots and lots of other people can tell you the same thing.
I remember a lawyer who posted on Slashdot last year. He said in civil cases a person a person doesn't need to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Just being "probably guilty" was enough. That answered questions from people who thought they could just hide or destroy their hard drive with the assumption that there would then be no evidence. Under civil laws it wouldn't matter. If their was an ISP number found and an uploaded file that was "probably guilty" right there. They would hardly need the hard drive. The lawyer said people who still tried to play things tough and be uncooperative would most likely just be cited for contempt and worsen their condition.
Ed Bott was also the author of the most popular Windows Xp manual:
"Microsoft Windows XP Inside Out"
I imagine Ed Bott,s M$ contacts are very strong. This "leak" looks more like a contrived trial balloon being floated.
I find more and more sellers are phony. They can even have a high "positive" rating and they burn you. There are so many bogus electronic sales its amazing. Laptop auctions come with emails inviting people to make end around offer. A Google search shows email addy on long list of phonies kept by private groups concerned with ebay fraud. You can find lots of interesting items with no bidders even in the last minutes. Why? Because people know they are phony. I got burned twice on ebay for cheap DVD's for sale by sellers with high positive ratings. Then I get notices from ebay warning me about seller. Oh it seems people, can hack/fake accounts. Haha too late for me. Getting burned gets almost no action from ebay, Paypal etc. Ebay went from interesting auction to flea market full of high prices, phony hustlers and junk. A friend bought big collection of all Buffy DVD sets. They were meant to be in excellent condtion. Then big box of broken plastic arrives and seller listing is gone. Lots of people figured out the deal and ebay. Amazon is much better. "How Amazon and Google are taking eBay's Business" http://slashdot.org/articles/05/06/22/2154201.shtm l
My hometown of Peekskill New york got hit with a meteorite back in the 90's. It crashed through the back of an old junker car belonging to 17 year old girl. She was in tears. Turned out she got about 80,000 USD for the rock and the car. It was only known car to be hit. The car and meteorite went on display in Museum Of Natural History and other museums around the world. It was also filmed going across sky in Washington. Every year around this time I hope for my car to get hit. A view of meteor in sky before it hit is on this cool meteor site:
http://fireball.meteorite.free.fr/index_en.html
AOL was just in the news over the weekend in an article about a woman who can't get AOL to cancel her dead fathers account. What an awful company. Lets not forget AOL was also the company that had the employee who sold a few hundred thousand credit card numbers. I don't think I would even use the free stuff they are now advertising. They probably have rootkits at the ready - easily detectable ones at that - just to really implode in grand style.
s ts.nsf/techtalk/story/A0F7FD49EFA6565A862571BF006C 005A?OpenDocument
As the Marquis de Talleyrand said after losing a chess game. ""It is worse than a crime, it is a blunder!"
Even dead people can't escape AOL
By David Sheets
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
08/04/2006
Maxine Gauthier doesn't own a computer. She doesn't know the first thing about Web browsing or sending e-mail. She's not even sure where to find a computer's "on" button, as she describes it.
Yet for the past nine months, she has been fighting one of the most persistent and some say irritating institutions in cyberspace: AOL, formerly known as America Online.
"They just haven't wanted to let go," the 55-year-old St. Louisan said. "I don't think they'll ever really let go."
The problem? An AOL account once held by Gauthier's late father still showed billing charges accumulating against it. The account had been dormant for months; the credit card he used for it was inactive at least as long.
Nevertheless, AOL kept charging $25.90 each month for dial-up online access. Late fees for non-payment accumulated on the credit card, too.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/business/columni
I had AOL dial-up for one year. I had AOL for Broadband for 2 years. I finally got tired of FORCED updates I didn't want and endless ghetto content. When I called to end all my services from AOL I was raked over coals. I was interrogated (and I mean interrogated) about my reasons for wanting to end service. I said I just wanted to end my service. The interrogation contiuned and I got pressed for my adware/spyware software usage. I was now fighting with the AOL rep to get my service ended. Despite my very obvious desire to end my service my rep proceeded to give instructions for downloading some browser.
At that point I reminded my rep that the Attorney General in my state (NY) had already filed a case against AOL for doing exactly what she was doing then (strong arming people and not allowing them to cancel their services when asked). I told her I would call the AG with a compliant and use her name. At that point she finally cancelled my services.
AOL has a well established record of legal violations and disgraceful business tactics (not to mention dumb ones). The people who willfully and knowingly performed these things are sleaze bags (and it seems AOL had LOTS of them). I find a lot of things deserve compassion in the world but f00kin AOL and its army of creep employees aint one of them.
A lot of movies are like pinball games where a story sort of bangs around with a lot of lights and noises going off. It's all well and good to blame execs who focus on the bottom line and focus on making safe profits for their 100 million investment. I just don't think that 100 million is even needed to start with. I think Hollywood and it's audiences are way too impressed with technological wizbang. Even the amount of superfluous noise in movies is becoming a burden.
Some people say "oh well there have always been bad movies and each year there are still the good ones and it's not accurate to focus on the failures". I can't agree if that "failure" cost 100 or 200 million. "Donnie Darko" cost around 4 million and was written and made by a kid basically. If the movie has been given the "safe" blockbuster treatment it would have been a pile of soul less noise and technological gimmicks -all very expensive - and unnecessary. Even a successful movie like "Titanic" had another 15-20 minutes of fancy crap that could have been cut to no bad effect.
I swear the more "realistic" they try to make these movies look and sound the phonier they seem. It all more heat than light and the sound pollution in films keeps me o
put of the theatres
I think a lot of execs read a few books or take a few weekend seminars on screenwriting and they get very taken in by "formula". I remember when a weekend seminar with Robert McKee was all the rage. People learned things like "Inciting incident>progressive complications>conflict>crisis>resolution" and they thought they had the secret recipe. People even though dialogue hardly matters as long as the "structure" was there. Of course translating that formula into a visually engaging story was another matter. Heck even best selling books often bomb as films. I could write down a formula for meeting the perfect spouse but that doesn't mean I could easily translate it into a reality.
" agree with you that management is most likely to blame but for another reason. As projects like this become complex, it requires very good management to ensure that the important details are not overlooked. With as many problems as the Big Dig seemed to have before completion, it would seem that the management was not up to the task"
A problem with these municipal jobs is that there are too many chiefs and not enough Indians -except when their is a problem - then nobody wants to take control and/or make a tough decision. I am a contractor who learned to stay away from municipal prevailing wage jobs. There were too many regulations and hoops to jump through. The state, county and municipal agencies all have their "overseers" with all sorts of demands and criteria but they often conflict with each other as well as the other people such as architects and engineers etc.
However when a real need for guidance arises, or a decision needs to be made, many bosses and supervisors suddenly are hard to find and/or they defer to someone else who also defers to someone else etc. A project can easily get "finished" with many important and delicate details simply fudged or ignored (often seen in tandem with smaller, less significant details that got scrutinized to death at great cost). It's amazing to me more people don't get hurt or injured.
I work on construction jobs and have learned that many illegals from countries south of the border not only don't read English they don't read Spanish either. I can also say that while their capacity for physical labor is substantial, their lack of attention to finer details and "finishing skills" is a real liability. A lot of these guys are also often tired from many hours of overtime and are often a lot more compromised in their abilities than their enthusiasm would suggest.
It was mentioned on Slashdot last May that rumors were circulating about Microsoft acquiring Ebay:
3 1&from=rss
http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/05/27/06502
The New York Post wrote:
"May 26, 2006 -- For several weeks Microsoft has been in discussions about a possible acquisition of online auctioneer eBay, The Post has learned.
According to multiple sources close to the matter, Microsoft has considered buying eBay and merging it with its MSN portal - a deal that would give MSN and eBay considerable clout to take on Google. "
http://www.nypost.com/business/64226.htm
There must surely be more to this move threat of eBay's than meets the eye. On the simple face of things I think eBay refusing Google payments would be like eBay cutting off its nose to spite its face. Google is the "golden child" of the moment and has tremendous clout and cache. EBay is brimming with fraud and losing many of its best sellers to Amazon. Customers who get ripped of by bogus sellers get little help from eBay or PayPal and there is an increasing resentment against them. EBay to refusing Google payments would just paint it even more into a corner. Seeing eBay's threat against a Microsoft merger would make more sense - even if its still a bad idea.
Actually the Telco "monopoly" was busted up. The rest of what you say from there is convoluted. You make the Telcos an arm of government and them "not". I can see where the Telcos have their own ax to grind as well as the Google, Yahoo etc. but the Internet/web are growing so large and pervasive that old telecommunication structures and their economies will longer function realistically. Yet Net Neutrality and its beneficiaries try to keep them in place while they benefit.
My broadband connection with Verizon has doubled in speed the last 2 years while the cost has almost been cut in half. Telcos want more money but not from basic users, they want it from big commercial users who want to piggyback on Telco services and markets.
I understand your point when you mention ISP's over selling but I dont see where it means Yahoo etc. gets to offer free phone calls and undercut the very networks it needs.
When a massive hurricane causes thousands of dollars in damage to lines it's not Google that's coming to fix them. Yet this same Google(and Yahoo,Skype MSN etc.)wants to offer "free" phone calls over Telcos networks without any "commercial" rate for pricing. It's hardly fair that a Google can use a Telco network to take Telco business away and then scream "net neutrality" if Telcos seek a higher rate for web giants making looking to make millions without the overhead faced by networks.
I once a "Net Neutality" enthusiast but the more I learn about it the more it "un-neutral" it seems. Kudos to Google and Vin Serf for getting some people to think supporting Net Neutrality is good for the "little guy". To me its just looking more as a way for big Web companies to make money off the network maintainers backs.
Oh I know the Googles etc pay their use fees but they dont pay a commercial rate like most Telcos and power cos get to charge. Just because people pay rent on an apartment doesn't the renter can turn around and sublet the same apartment in a manner that's harmful to original renter. I can't rent a one bedroom apartment then rent it out to a dozen other people. This net neutrality just seems like a way of keeping a lopsided arrangement unfairly beneficial for the Googles.
I would add that Telco services also have a lot of taxes built in to their services that the Googles dont have yet. Governments have their hands pretty deep in Telco pockets. It's unrealistic to think governments and Telcos will just "back-off" for the sake neutrality and let the Googles make millions by providing Telco services without the overhead liabilities.
This Net Neutrality looks pretty lopsided to me. As much as I despise Telcos I can see their points.
It was just last year that the music labels not only wanted to raise the price of downloadng music but they were talking about demanding a percentage of iPod sales. It would not be paranoid to suspect that the labels would use any iPod profit disclosures against them - and with some prejudice.
If Apple showed a 50% percent profit on iPod sales, labels could demand a percentage of that 50% without regard to how iPod sales cover losses in other areas. This article already shows a penchant for dividing iPod from Apple computer sales. In the event of label demands and/or legal actions Apple could end up getting hung with its own rope.
Of course Apple could always use a shell game to manipulate profits. How many Hollywood films ended-up not showing a profit after some "broader" accounting. Not providing info while also not shape shifting any books is probably a prudent to way to go even is it looks bad in a narrower context.