What's wrong with a Airport Express? A hundred bucks per output. And a $25 more for a copy of Airfoil to patch your subscription service into that.
I've been doing it for 4 years now (give or take) and love it. Had it come out a year earlier I could have saved a lot of dough on a high end CD player.
Why should anyone get a lifetime income for one thing they created? If they do, why would they bother creating anything else? More money?
But we aren't really talking about _creators_ here, we're talking about rights owners. The author is still alive, but they don't get anything worth lobbying for. As Bob Newhart said on Sound Opinions last week... when he showed up to audit the labels records he was told there was a "fire" in the N's section of the records department. Nothing that would prevent the label from loosing revenue, but no evidence on what they owe to Bob.
Are there any Shelf features that are still missing from the Dock? You mean the feature that doesn't render all of the screen real estate to the left and right of the Dock useless? Nor is it useful for file transfer operations.
The dock was pretty much Windows taskbar with a trash icon and no tray. The shelf was useful for manipulating files.
And Windows Vista was originally targeted for... when? THAT OS sure feels rushed to me... Who cares about Vista, we're talking about OS X. Smelling one turd and remarking on it's fetid bouquet takes nothing away from the next piece of poo.
so when apple releases 10.4.2 (a free upgrade from 10.4.1) that doesn't fix any bugs? Only a precious few that get them either a lot of bad press or simply make things completely broken and or useless. A category which I was careful to omit in my post. Sure some critical cases of failure get patched, meanwhile my PC crashed, so I've got several minutes spinning beach ball hell to wait on.
Automator screws up URL lists? Not critical even if annoying, you get to wait years. Did you know the new version frequently fails to import the last versions actions? Didn't see that one in the patch notes. Finder locks up when a network resource disappears? You get to wait years. In the replacement windows shares simply do not populate in the side bar, documented since before the initial release. It worked once, Steve even demoed it, still unfixed.
But here we are again discussing a clearly minor rhetorical error (which is actually a reading comprehension issue on your part) rather than trying to understand the meaning.
Somehow we manage to go over this in half the Apple articles, but people still don't seem to get it.
A minor rhetorical error really, and the choir always seems to chime in with the same response ignoring the meaning. The GP has a point, critical issues asside, bugs in OS X don't get fixed until the next major release. Adding some lipstick and a backup tool doesn't really do it for people who are doing more than surfing the web. Sure we got _some_ of the fixes 10.4 needed, and we got a slew of new problems.
I can't think of a single person in our office brimming with Mac biggots who wouldn't rather pay $400 for an OS X 10.4 with bug fixes over $130 for 10.5.
Service packs are just bundles of all the security updates since the last service pack.
Actually they contain pretty much all of the important updates, new features, and security updates. All of which you can read about in explicit detail on the Microsoft website including things such as the files updated, what exactly was broken, and work arounds if you can't/won't update a particular feature.
I don't know why Apple refuses to address these issues. None of them seem like they would be incredibly hard/expensive to fix, but Apple just seems to have the attitude that if it works in the general cases, there is no need to investigate the extremes and fix whatever problems may arise. I think that for the most part... "You already paid for it, why should we do any more." Apple just doesn't fix shit unless they've got egg on their face. Pretty much security and catastrophic bugs. Everything else waits for the next version.
I don't like Vista (still run XP on most of my systems) but at least Microsoft documents their bugs and work arounds instead of pretending nothing is wrong.
On the other hand, Apple is cheap. A 130 dollar OS and 80 bucks for a suite of tools for total noob's isn't a bad price.
But I'd pay $400 for an Ultimate edition that worked.
That's actually not what you said. You constructed a statement I did not make, and argued against that. That is the very definition of a straw man. What you said "My assertion..." denies your claim in the same paragraph. You may have thought that was what I was saying but the crux is in what was actually said. And in reality that would appease almost no-one. You see all of the infighting going on in the Muslim world? A jerk is a jerk no matter what hat he wears or banner he flies. Do you really think that I'm only talking about Muslims or the war? Do you think they're the only people that have reason to be angry with America?
I'll give you a hand for looking it up though. You might read some Noam Chomsky if you're interested in America's role in the world. You might not agree with his opinions, but the facts are thoroughly researched, documented, and irrefutable. Unlike so many pundits in the media he never confuses the two.
Quit doing things that make other people want to knock our buildings down.
So you would pass the 'Let's All Become Muslim' Bill? Now, I think our foreign policy is a mess, and we have given ourselves a black eye with our military. But there is a sizable group of people that won't be happy until our men all have beards, and our women are wearing burkas. Ahh the straw man, my least favorite logical fallacy and the most over used tool of contrarians everywhere. It's not even a good straw man, your emotion and confusion are completely transparent.
I would answer your question except that I've learned over the years that pretty much anyone who opens up with a straw man isn't interested in truth, facts or solutions. They don't know what they talk about (otherwise they'd come up with a much better and relevant argument) and are more or less only interested in their own point of view (boring).
Quit doing things that make other people want to knock our buildings down.
Understandably this will make a number of very large corporations unhappy. But knocking a couple zero's off a few dozen people's income doesn't bother me much.
There's lots of other things I'd do, but this is the big one we've been refusing to make eye contact with for about 70 years.
If the economy takes a dive, I'll maybe push for a large domestic project rather than invent a war. Maybe an interstate highway syste... aww damn... I'll come up with something good.
Greenpeace used to be a reasonably decent organization. With all of their wealth and power, they could actually be affecting real change instead of bullying for dollars.
This seems to be a frequent issue with charitable organizations. Once they achieve their goal or enough business types get involved, instead of dissolving they transform into a money making operation. I guess it's just more profitable to ride the coat tails of your founders than to actually do something worth while.
and use the money to keep the cost of the game down BWAhahahahahahaha HAHAHAhahahahahah HAHAHAHAHAhahahahahahah
I'm just saying , the cost of the game is the same as any other. If they port it to a console you can bet your ass it'll have the same 30% console sucker tax that every other game has... Scratch that, it'll be in the bargain bin by the time it makes the 360. So that becomes a %50 console tax.
That's on top of the subscription fees.
Not that I have a problem with it*, but they should just call it what it is... The Bill Roper Lamborghini fund.
*actually I do, but not enough to make a fuss about it.
I'm not sure I'd limit it to "companies like", pushing the limits of what the law will permit in terms of consumer deception, even fraud, is broad and pervasive throughout the commercial sector. About all you can do is make noise and file a suit. Noise, lately, has been very effective if you can get enough interest in it. It shouldn't be very hard to write a piece equating their behavior here to a very reasonable lack of confidence in google checkout (a product Google cares very much about). If they're untrustworthy when they're outright taking your money, how much trust can you have when they aren't even the recipient of that cash?
Speaking of... whatever happened to all of those support contracts Microsoft made with the software upgrades included when they were trying to move people to XP. I hate to ask, but Google just returns a mountain of blogcest about vista.
It's hard to plagi^h^h^h^h^h quote an article if it is too large. More than a paragraph or so and it won't fit into the summary at Digg.
It certainly seems that the net has created a cottage industry built on not citing the original article and driving technorati. One might say that one denies the other. The drive isn't news anymore, it's notoriety and advertising. Long articles and sources sour both of those. I don't think there's a shortage of people who want to read the long stuff, there's just so many that can't be bothered. Both groups pay the same per view, so who are you going to appeal to?
The internet may have changed some things, but it's AdSense that is murdering information on the web. Is it any wonder that the more successful google is, the less useful their index has become.
Considering the level of documentation and rarity of bone marrow transplants... I'm not sure it's really the beginning of the end. Maybe the beginning of one more step in a very limited number of cases...
I wonder how many of these differences would be more apparently with some motion and several sequential frames. I know there are texture effects that look OK when the user isn't moving but terrible when he is, although DX9 already has enhancements for that.
Still, nothing there makes me want to jump out and buy a $600 graphics card. Someday I'll have to move to PCIe, SATA, and multi-core; perhaps that will be the time. If it's with a 64 bit OS, so much the better. Well, the articles missed the most important part of DX 10. Gaming/hardware review sites sometimes touch on the issue, but rarely give it as much import as it deserves. It's not 9 vs 10 that's interesting, it's that for the first time in history DX 10 output is the same regardless of hardware vendor*. Long term it will pay off in spades for customers as doctored drivers and "cheats" are no longer part of the equation when trying to evaluate hardware. This is pretty much essential for moving window composting to the video card. Sure the increase in precision and certain features have dropped performance "a bit", but it is also a show stopper for anyone who is trying to do "real work" on a Vista PC.
Oh and DirectX 10 parts start at around $60, not $600 and the cost of excelent gaming hardware still starts at around 250-300 dollars, same as for the previous generation.
And I don't download and install "free" programs and games. I think this is the real reason you don't have trouble.
I haven't had a virus "hit" since about 1995, sent to me on a floppy disc via my employer (word macro virus). But then I live behind a router, update whenever MS tells me too and avoid seedy places on the net. I used firefox for a long while but have gone back to IE (a debate for a later time). Updating when MS wants to is a big part of that. Most of the exploits out there had long been patched by the time they hit the front page. The rest, since I know better than to visit freenaked.sluts.sl0283nhdhs.2893.ebay.ru haven't ever been a problem.
I've not bothered to even put AV software on my vista box (not used for work), all I use it for is playing games and "safe" activities. I think, really, that that is the number 1 anti virus tool. If I want to see pictures of Anna Kournikova naked I'll check out the stileproject forums.
But he's an asshole in a good way. Indeed, seconded. For that matter, from what I've seen if you don't harass or berate the man you don't get asshole Linus. Even when you do, getting dressed down by someone who knows WTF is up and is goal oriented and not just fucking with you hurts more, but is less humiliating than the usual abuse we (people) take from know nothing assholes who just want to ruin you for shits and giggles.
I haven't had a chance to play Halo 3 yet, so I can't say anything about the game as a whole, but I'm glad to see they're more concerned with a steady frame-rate than killer visuals. I'd rather play a game at 320x240 with acceptable FPS (which I did back in the days of the original Unreal when I didn't have an accelerator) than play at 1024x768 at 20. Anything under 30 FPS irritates me to no end. Absolutely true, and it's hardly the first time this has been done. Several high profile games don't render at 720p, Project Gotham and Tomb Raider both render 600 lines and Perfect Dark 640.
I'm not saying it is copacetic, but lots of people miss the point. Does it look good enough, does it look like you were told it would look, does it cause any real problems when playing? Personally I don't have a problem with it, but I have a nice enough 1080p display and use HDMI for connecting the two. It looks fuzzy, even ugly compared to some of the best content, but good enough once you quit worrying about it. I have seen people using component connectors to a 720p display which by the time you account for the reduced rendering resolution, overscan*, and the fewer pixels to smooth with with on the TV end, these games look noticeably poorer. Without a reference though, most people wouldn't notice, and it is obviously much better than standard TV output.
*which is far uglier, and on many HDTV's throws away almost as much data again. Somehow this never seems to get any attention in the HDMI/component flamewars that crop up here and there.
There better be something good in there eating all those cycles. We will have been waiting for over two years.... The keynote demo's looked more like weekend projects that were a result of someone taking code home to play with. New lipstick on the same pig if you will.
Take a step back from 100% independence, forget about the batteries or selling back to the grid and just take what you can get for 6-8 hours a day. That will leave a hefty dent in the production needs of our power generation infrastructure which is pretty much built around that time period. The costs of that will be reduced tremendously.*
Your two year figure is very good. I see no reason to complicate it with batteries and sell back. Even a poor efficiency curve (within reason) only effects this span by a few months. We'll continue to need our power plants for the forseeable future and I don't think this tech needs to eliminate them to be worth while.
*Don't expect your utility companies CEO to accept a reduction in revenue simply because their costs have dropped significantly.
Slashdot Mirror
What's wrong with a Airport Express? A hundred bucks per output. And a $25 more for a copy of Airfoil to patch your subscription service into that.
I've been doing it for 4 years now (give or take) and love it. Had it come out a year earlier I could have saved a lot of dough on a high end CD player.
But we aren't really talking about _creators_ here, we're talking about rights owners. The author is still alive, but they don't get anything worth lobbying for. As Bob Newhart said on Sound Opinions last week... when he showed up to audit the labels records he was told there was a "fire" in the N's section of the records department. Nothing that would prevent the label from loosing revenue, but no evidence on what they owe to Bob.
Nor is it useful for file transfer operations.
The dock was pretty much Windows taskbar with a trash icon and no tray.
The shelf was useful for manipulating files.
Automator screws up URL lists? Not critical even if annoying, you get to wait years. Did you know the new version frequently fails to import the last versions actions? Didn't see that one in the patch notes.
Finder locks up when a network resource disappears? You get to wait years. In the replacement windows shares simply do not populate in the side bar, documented since before the initial release. It worked once, Steve even demoed it, still unfixed.
But here we are again discussing a clearly minor rhetorical error (which is actually a reading comprehension issue on your part) rather than trying to understand the meaning.
Somehow we manage to go over this in half the Apple articles, but people still don't seem to get it.
A minor rhetorical error really, and the choir always seems to chime in with the same response ignoring the meaning. The GP has a point, critical issues asside, bugs in OS X don't get fixed until the next major release. Adding some lipstick and a backup tool doesn't really do it for people who are doing more than surfing the web. Sure we got _some_ of the fixes 10.4 needed, and we got a slew of new problems.
I can't think of a single person in our office brimming with Mac biggots who wouldn't rather pay $400 for an OS X 10.4 with bug fixes over $130 for 10.5.
Service packs are just bundles of all the security updates since the last service pack.
Actually they contain pretty much all of the important updates, new features, and security updates.
All of which you can read about in explicit detail on the Microsoft website including things such as the files updated, what exactly was broken, and work arounds if you can't/won't update a particular feature.
I don't like Vista (still run XP on most of my systems) but at least Microsoft documents their bugs and work arounds instead of pretending nothing is wrong.
On the other hand, Apple is cheap. A 130 dollar OS and 80 bucks for a suite of tools for total noob's isn't a bad price.
But I'd pay $400 for an Ultimate edition that worked.
That's actually not what you said. You constructed a statement I did not make, and argued against that. That is the very definition of a straw man. What you said "My assertion..." denies your claim in the same paragraph. You may have thought that was what I was saying but the crux is in what was actually said. And in reality that would appease almost no-one. You see all of the infighting going on in the Muslim world? A jerk is a jerk no matter what hat he wears or banner he flies. Do you really think that I'm only talking about Muslims or the war? Do you think they're the only people that have reason to be angry with America?
I'll give you a hand for looking it up though. You might read some Noam Chomsky if you're interested in America's role in the world. You might not agree with his opinions, but the facts are thoroughly researched, documented, and irrefutable. Unlike so many pundits in the media he never confuses the two.
So you would pass the 'Let's All Become Muslim' Bill? Now, I think our foreign policy is a mess, and we have given ourselves a black eye with our military. But there is a sizable group of people that won't be happy until our men all have beards, and our women are wearing burkas. Ahh the straw man, my least favorite logical fallacy and the most over used tool of contrarians everywhere. It's not even a good straw man, your emotion and confusion are completely transparent.
I would answer your question except that I've learned over the years that pretty much anyone who opens up with a straw man isn't interested in truth, facts or solutions. They don't know what they talk about (otherwise they'd come up with a much better and relevant argument) and are more or less only interested in their own point of view (boring).
Quit doing things that make other people want to knock our buildings down.
Understandably this will make a number of very large corporations unhappy. But knocking a couple zero's off a few dozen people's income doesn't bother me much.
There's lots of other things I'd do, but this is the big one we've been refusing to make eye contact with for about 70 years.
If the economy takes a dive, I'll maybe push for a large domestic project rather than invent a war. Maybe an interstate highway syste... aww damn... I'll come up with something good.
Promise.
Indeed, since when did Commander Taco's blog become more responsible for content than any other blag.
Greenpeace used to be a reasonably decent organization. With all of their wealth and power, they could actually be affecting real change instead of bullying for dollars.
This seems to be a frequent issue with charitable organizations. Once they achieve their goal or enough business types get involved, instead of dissolving they transform into a money making operation. I guess it's just more profitable to ride the coat tails of your founders than to actually do something worth while.
I'm just saying , the cost of the game is the same as any other. If they port it to a console you can bet your ass it'll have the same 30% console sucker tax that every other game has... Scratch that, it'll be in the bargain bin by the time it makes the 360. So that becomes a %50 console tax.
That's on top of the subscription fees.
Not that I have a problem with it*, but they should just call it what it is... The Bill Roper Lamborghini fund.
*actually I do, but not enough to make a fuss about it.
I'm not sure I'd limit it to "companies like", pushing the limits of what the law will permit in terms of consumer deception, even fraud, is broad and pervasive throughout the commercial sector. About all you can do is make noise and file a suit. Noise, lately, has been very effective if you can get enough interest in it. It shouldn't be very hard to write a piece equating their behavior here to a very reasonable lack of confidence in google checkout (a product Google cares very much about). If they're untrustworthy when they're outright taking your money, how much trust can you have when they aren't even the recipient of that cash?
Speaking of... whatever happened to all of those support contracts Microsoft made with the software upgrades included when they were trying to move people to XP. I hate to ask, but Google just returns a mountain of blogcest about vista.
It's hard to plagi^h^h^h^h^h quote an article if it is too large. More than a paragraph or so and it won't fit into the summary at Digg.
It certainly seems that the net has created a cottage industry built on not citing the original article and driving technorati. One might say that one denies the other. The drive isn't news anymore, it's notoriety and advertising. Long articles and sources sour both of those. I don't think there's a shortage of people who want to read the long stuff, there's just so many that can't be bothered. Both groups pay the same per view, so who are you going to appeal to?
The internet may have changed some things, but it's AdSense that is murdering information on the web. Is it any wonder that the more successful google is, the less useful their index has become.
Considering the level of documentation and rarity of bone marrow transplants... I'm not sure it's really the beginning of the end. Maybe the beginning of one more step in a very limited number of cases...
Still, nothing there makes me want to jump out and buy a $600 graphics card. Someday I'll have to move to PCIe, SATA, and multi-core; perhaps that will be the time. If it's with a 64 bit OS, so much the better. Well, the articles missed the most important part of DX 10. Gaming/hardware review sites sometimes touch on the issue, but rarely give it as much import as it deserves. It's not 9 vs 10 that's interesting, it's that for the first time in history DX 10 output is the same regardless of hardware vendor*. Long term it will pay off in spades for customers as doctored drivers and "cheats" are no longer part of the equation when trying to evaluate hardware. This is pretty much essential for moving window composting to the video card. Sure the increase in precision and certain features have dropped performance "a bit", but it is also a show stopper for anyone who is trying to do "real work" on a Vista PC.
Oh and DirectX 10 parts start at around $60, not $600 and the cost of excelent gaming hardware still starts at around 250-300 dollars, same as for the previous generation.
I haven't had a virus "hit" since about 1995, sent to me on a floppy disc via my employer (word macro virus). But then I live behind a router, update whenever MS tells me too and avoid seedy places on the net. I used firefox for a long while but have gone back to IE (a debate for a later time). Updating when MS wants to is a big part of that. Most of the exploits out there had long been patched by the time they hit the front page. The rest, since I know better than to visit freenaked.sluts.sl0283nhdhs.2893.ebay.ru haven't ever been a problem.
I've not bothered to even put AV software on my vista box (not used for work), all I use it for is playing games and "safe" activities. I think, really, that that is the number 1 anti virus tool. If I want to see pictures of Anna Kournikova naked I'll check out the stileproject forums.
But he's an asshole in a good way. Indeed, seconded. For that matter, from what I've seen if you don't harass or berate the man you don't get asshole Linus.
Even when you do, getting dressed down by someone who knows WTF is up and is goal oriented and not just fucking with you hurts more, but is less humiliating than the usual abuse we (people) take from know nothing assholes who just want to ruin you for shits and giggles.
I'm not saying it is copacetic, but lots of people miss the point. Does it look good enough, does it look like you were told it would look, does it cause any real problems when playing? Personally I don't have a problem with it, but I have a nice enough 1080p display and use HDMI for connecting the two. It looks fuzzy, even ugly compared to some of the best content, but good enough once you quit worrying about it. I have seen people using component connectors to a 720p display which by the time you account for the reduced rendering resolution, overscan*, and the fewer pixels to smooth with with on the TV end, these games look noticeably poorer. Without a reference though, most people wouldn't notice, and it is obviously much better than standard TV output.
*which is far uglier, and on many HDTV's throws away almost as much data again. Somehow this never seems to get any attention in the HDMI/component flamewars that crop up here and there.
There better be something good in there eating all those cycles. We will have been waiting for over two years.... The keynote demo's looked more like weekend projects that were a result of someone taking code home to play with. New lipstick on the same pig if you will.
Take a step back from 100% independence, forget about the batteries or selling back to the grid and just take what you can get for 6-8 hours a day. That will leave a hefty dent in the production needs of our power generation infrastructure which is pretty much built around that time period. The costs of that will be reduced tremendously.*
Your two year figure is very good. I see no reason to complicate it with batteries and sell back. Even a poor efficiency curve (within reason) only effects this span by a few months. We'll continue to need our power plants for the forseeable future and I don't think this tech needs to eliminate them to be worth while.
*Don't expect your utility companies CEO to accept a reduction in revenue simply because their costs have dropped significantly.
IDG want to be sure they have an easy time of it.
this story should be tagged "makinglemonade"