by the way, what did xerox end up doing do with all these great user interface tools that they developed? They let Apple and Microsoft take them in one of the biggest business blunders ever.
In the last 10 years how many of the "big" inventions have Microsoft created for this budget. Zero, zip, nada, not a single sausage. In the 1970s Xerox managed to invent windowing operating systems, ethernet, laser printers, wirelesss networking (using lasers though) and a whole heap of other things. IBM have done a huge amount with transactional processing, system availability, domaining, messaging, brokerage and lots of other bits
I guess IP version 6 doesn't count for shit right? Maybe you should check your facts buddy. They produce a lot of cool stuff, but a lot of stuff that you wouldn't recognize like accessablity tools for the blind, deaf etc.. You can bash MS all you want, but if you rip reaserch.microsoft.com, you just don't know what you're talking about.
Can we please STFU about the 640K thing already, he didn't fucking say it. (see below)
QUESTION: I read in a newspaper that in 1981 you said, ``640K of memory should be enough for anybody.'' What did you mean when you said this?
ANSWER: I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time.
The need for memory increases as computers get more potent and software gets more powerful. In fact, every couple of years the amount of memory address space needed to run whatever software is mainstream at the time just about doubles. This is well-known.
When IBM introduced its PC in 1981, many people attacked Microsoft for its role. These critics said that 8-bit computers, which had 64K of address space, would last forever. They said we were wastefully throwing out great 8-bit programming by moving the world toward 16-bit computers.
We at Microsoft disagreed. We knew that even 16-bit computers, which had 640K of available address space, would be adequate for only four or five years. (The IBM PC had 1 megabyte of logical address space. But 384K of this was assigned to special purposes, leaving 640K of memory available. That's where the now-infamous ``640K barrier'' came from.)
A few years later, Microsoft was a big fan of Intel's 386 microprocessor chip, which gave computers a 32-bit address space.
Modern operating systems can now take advantage of that seemingly vast potential memory. But even 32 bits of address space won't prove adequate as time goes on.
Meanwhile, I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again.
I wonder how fast it will take these to hit the market? With the impending XBox 360 release, I'm sure it would be nice for them to slip something like this in considering the PS2 will be using Blue-Ray.
Yeah, thats some nice bullshit you just pulled out of your ass. Last time I checked, MS had 50+ million in the bank, I don't think losing a few hundred million dollars is going to break the bank. Microsoft has been loss leading this entire time, its part of their plan.
As for Sony having the "hardware" and "infrastructure" (whatever that means), I think you need to get a clue. Sony is taking a pretty big gamble using CELL tech, and they are known for releasing faulty garbage (PSP broken pixels, disk read error anyone?)
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, but don't post PS2 fanboy bullshit here. XBox isn't going anywhere.
This is probably off topic, but I've been waiting for a while to ask this question, and this topic is close enough. Can someone explain why pressing suspend modem is so destructive to online games, and why its so hard to fix? I suspect its because most games use UDP, but I have yet to find a definitive answer.
Actually, If i remember correctly, part of the deal was that they could use the IBM name/brand for 7 or 8 years, something like that anyways. Nonetheless, I doubt we'll be seeing the lonovo brand name without an IBM next to it for some time.
No, they can't take advantage of it. There is no possible way for game developers to take advantage of a processor that was built from the ground up with an eye towards gaming. Sony is so fucking stupid that they made it totally impossible to develop games for the processor they have intended to put into their next gaming console for as long as I can remember.
You obviously aren't a programmer or have no clue what im asking. If RTFP, you would see that I was asking if these features were practical. From what I understand the PS2 was extremely hard to code for, most developers had to break into assembly language to do a lot of things, whereas XBox uses DirectX, which isn't the easiest either, but it at least is a well known API.
Obviously there is some power here. What I'm curious about is:
1. Will Video Games be able to take advantage of this (PS3)
2. I know multithreading opens a huge bag of worms in programming (Race Conditions, concurrency, deadlock, etc.). So, How hard will it be to develop i.e. will the SDK's be any good.
This could be the most powerful system on earth, but if the game devlopers cant code against it, then whats the point?
Google is definately at the top in the search engine business, no doubt about that. The current MSN search is a total piece of crap. But I've tried the beta, and honestly its not that bad, sure its no google yet, but I don't really think that matters.
Most search engine users are very fickle, they don't care who provides it as long as the thing works, and this is why I think google may be in trouble in the future. MSN.com is the default page for just about every windows machine, if MS gets something that works, it could spell trouble for google.
The multiplayer is pretty sweet. Unlike other games *cough* halo2, it actually takes a considerable amount of skill and strategy to play well as oppossed to spawn, look for weapon, kill, die, repeat.
There will always be reviews out there you don't like. First, this is information week, the WSJ for the pointy haired bosses, I would expect nothing less than a shitty review, actually, I'm glad he gave it a shitty review.
Second, the guy looks like a total Asshat. Look at his picture for christs sakes Fred Langa
that brought down al-jazeera.net when the US invaded Iraq? Remember the 2 week long denial of service attack and subsequent attacks after beheadings and what not?
Slashdot Mirror
I think your wrong on the paid service required part of xbox live, I've heard there will be free and premium versions of it.
try this
by the way, what did xerox end up doing do with all these great user interface tools that they developed? They let Apple and Microsoft take them in one of the biggest business blunders ever.
In the last 10 years how many of the "big" inventions have Microsoft created for this budget. Zero, zip, nada, not a single sausage. In the 1970s Xerox managed to invent windowing operating systems, ethernet, laser printers, wirelesss networking (using lasers though) and a whole heap of other things. IBM have done a huge amount with transactional processing, system availability, domaining, messaging, brokerage and lots of other bits
I guess IP version 6 doesn't count for shit right? Maybe you should check your facts buddy. They produce a lot of cool stuff, but a lot of stuff that you wouldn't recognize like accessablity tools for the blind, deaf etc.. You can bash MS all you want, but if you rip reaserch.microsoft.com, you just don't know what you're talking about.
Can we please STFU about the 640K thing already, he didn't fucking say it. (see below)
QUESTION: I read in a newspaper that in 1981 you said, ``640K of memory should be enough for anybody.'' What did you mean when you said this? ANSWER: I've said some stupid things and some wrong things, but not that. No one involved in computers would ever say that a certain amount of memory is enough for all time. The need for memory increases as computers get more potent and software gets more powerful. In fact, every couple of years the amount of memory address space needed to run whatever software is mainstream at the time just about doubles. This is well-known. When IBM introduced its PC in 1981, many people attacked Microsoft for its role. These critics said that 8-bit computers, which had 64K of address space, would last forever. They said we were wastefully throwing out great 8-bit programming by moving the world toward 16-bit computers. We at Microsoft disagreed. We knew that even 16-bit computers, which had 640K of available address space, would be adequate for only four or five years. (The IBM PC had 1 megabyte of logical address space. But 384K of this was assigned to special purposes, leaving 640K of memory available. That's where the now-infamous ``640K barrier'' came from.) A few years later, Microsoft was a big fan of Intel's 386 microprocessor chip, which gave computers a 32-bit address space. Modern operating systems can now take advantage of that seemingly vast potential memory. But even 32 bits of address space won't prove adequate as time goes on. Meanwhile, I keep bumping into that silly quotation attributed to me that says 640K of memory is enough. There's never a citation; the quotation just floats like a rumor, repeated again and again.
I really hope not, that is a hiddeous name.
I wonder how fast it will take these to hit the market? With the impending XBox 360 release, I'm sure it would be nice for them to slip something like this in considering the PS2 will be using Blue-Ray.
Wow, you really must've gotten stuffed in some lockers in high school, you sound like the proverbial whiny nerd.
Yeah, thats some nice bullshit you just pulled out of your ass. Last time I checked, MS had 50+ million in the bank, I don't think losing a few hundred million dollars is going to break the bank. Microsoft has been loss leading this entire time, its part of their plan.
As for Sony having the "hardware" and "infrastructure" (whatever that means), I think you need to get a clue. Sony is taking a pretty big gamble using CELL tech, and they are known for releasing faulty garbage (PSP broken pixels, disk read error anyone?)
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, but don't post PS2 fanboy bullshit here. XBox isn't going anywhere.
This is probably off topic, but I've been waiting for a while to ask this question, and this topic is close enough. Can someone explain why pressing suspend modem is so destructive to online games, and why its so hard to fix? I suspect its because most games use UDP, but I have yet to find a definitive answer.
holy wall of text!
If youre going to karma whore at least put in some <p>'s and <br>'s for us.
Known for its skills in Magic
...Sounds like a damn good idea.
Somtimes a single point of failure is the best option. Keep it simple (KISS). Just my 2 cents though.
Actually, If i remember correctly, part of the deal was that they could use the IBM name/brand for 7 or 8 years, something like that anyways. Nonetheless, I doubt we'll be seeing the lonovo brand name without an IBM next to it for some time.
No, they can't take advantage of it. There is no possible way for game developers to take advantage of a processor that was built from the ground up with an eye towards gaming. Sony is so fucking stupid that they made it totally impossible to develop games for the processor they have intended to put into their next gaming console for as long as I can remember. You obviously aren't a programmer or have no clue what im asking. If RTFP, you would see that I was asking if these features were practical. From what I understand the PS2 was extremely hard to code for, most developers had to break into assembly language to do a lot of things, whereas XBox uses DirectX, which isn't the easiest either, but it at least is a well known API.
Obviously there is some power here. What I'm curious about is :
1. Will Video Games be able to take advantage of this (PS3)
2. I know multithreading opens a huge bag of worms in programming (Race Conditions, concurrency, deadlock, etc.). So, How hard will it be to develop i.e. will the SDK's be any good.
This could be the most powerful system on earth, but if the game devlopers cant code against it, then whats the point?
About a hundred guys over at Microsoft are freaking out; figuring out how to patent this stuff for use in longhorn.
Google is definately at the top in the search engine business, no doubt about that. The current MSN search is a total piece of crap. But I've tried the beta, and honestly its not that bad, sure its no google yet, but I don't really think that matters.
Most search engine users are very fickle, they don't care who provides it as long as the thing works, and this is why I think google may be in trouble in the future. MSN.com is the default page for just about every windows machine, if MS gets something that works, it could spell trouble for google.
'We're almost as big as Oprah'
Don't worry, just keep eatin' the chilly dogs and mountain dew and you'll get there.
Hey, i made the same joke yesterday and only got a 2, Funny. I guess delivery beats originality :(
Sound almost like the Spanish American War Tax that we've been paying for the last 100 years on our telephone bills.
How the hell do thes companies get away with these idiotic taxes?
The multiplayer is pretty sweet. Unlike other games *cough* halo2, it actually takes a considerable amount of skill and strategy to play well as oppossed to spawn, look for weapon, kill, die, repeat.
There will always be reviews out there you don't like. First, this is information week, the WSJ for the pointy haired bosses, I would expect nothing less than a shitty review, actually, I'm glad he gave it a shitty review.
Second, the guy looks like a total Asshat. Look at his picture for christs sakes Fred Langa
just go here for the short version
holy wall of text.
But sadly we are all part of the vicious cycle
that brought down al-jazeera.net when the US invaded Iraq? Remember the 2 week long denial of service attack and subsequent attacks after beheadings and what not?
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/030327/152/dwem2.html/