The performance is most certainly larger than 5% (Consider that it can have upwards of 50% performance improvement over the 470 which was launched earlier this year.), but you fail to consider that this performance will be delivered for fewer watts, saving power both in and of itself and through the reduced need for cooling. Benchmarks from AnandTech show that Crysis will give this card a workout when played at 2560 x 1600 with high settings, so it's somewhat disingenuous to claim that there's nothing out there that will tax this card. It's definitely a card for enthusiast gamers who want to use the highest resolutions and graphics settings so it's definitely not something the mainstream will care about.
The new cards also have significant compute advantages compared to previous generation cards. The 570 has 4x the performance of a 285 in some benchmarks. The 285 came out less than two years ago and cost significantly more at the time of release. OpenCL is allowing graphics cards the opportunity to do a lot of things other than just 3D rendering. For some workflows, investing in these powerful graphics cards is a lot better than buying better CPUs.
I understand the point you're trying to make here, but please understand that in the real world otherwise intelligent people with a decent amount of common sense will behave like complete morons when put in front of a computer. For whatever reason they imagine that it's some kind of magic box and don't understand the damage that they can do to themselves with it.
Some will send their life savings to the prince of Nigeria; a few will open hotnude.jpg.exe, unleashing god knows what horrors on the machine; others will share all sorts of information that they probably shouldn't with phishers; more still will post pictures or comments in manners that could cost them a job or ruin a career;
People have these wonderful devices that they use without really understanding the dangers involved or the consequences of their actions. Protecting these people from themselves is a good thing and it's a partly why Apple is having money-fight Fridays every week. It's not really a jail if there's an easily accessible way out of it. Most people are probably better off in the comfort of the confined area. Anyone who's feeling adventurous or understands the risks can easily leave that area.
MS isn't being altruistic about this at all. It's a direct shot at Google, most specifically targeting how Google generates revenue. If they really wanted to turn the heat up, they could ship the browser with an ad blocker as well. Microsoft has finally realized that it's not going to unseat Google. If they can't have that money, why not deprive Google of it as well?
If the strategy worked ideally, it would demolish Google's revenues because they're unable to collect information about users and their ads aren't being seen by as many eyeballs. That's Google's bread and butter business right there. The reason for the existence of both Android and Chrome OS is to prevent this kind of lockout from happening. Android isn't completely under Google's control so it is possible to lock them out (See the Android phone that uses Bing for search and stories about Verizon possibly considering replacing the Android Marketplace with their own store.) if various third parties wanted to, but Chrome OS seems to be under Google's control to a larger extent at this point.
Google is smart and they realize that their position is open to attack, which is part of the reason they've been expanding into so many other areas and will continue to look for new ways to expose customers to their ads or gather information about users that can be used for targeted advertisements.
The benefit to open source is that if they get too evil, we can always fork the project and build in the tracking prevention. He'll we don't even have to wait for them to get evil.
It's not, but saying you're the new lemonade stand is not as enticing to potential investors. It's got to be the next dimension or a new paradigm. That's when the venture capital starts to flow.
That would totally explain why Motorola sued Apple first. No, wait, it wouldn't at all. Nokia also took the first swing in that scuffle as well. The only large recent suit where Apple instigated matters was against HTC. I don't think things are quite the way you paint them to be. This is all likely to end in one big cross-licensing deal where the established players carve out there own share of the market pie and keep anyone else from joining the party.
I don't know which patents Apple counter-sued with, but some are probably the same as the HTC lawsuit. Apple probably would have gone after Motorola in the future, especially if they won the HTC suit. The fact that they've just now tacked on more patents suggests that Motorola may have blindsided them a little.
The most interesting result in all of these disputes is when HTC settled with Microsoft. I don't know the details of the settlement, but it was reported that HTC would pay Microsoft for every phone sold, even the Android phones. Maybe they wanted protection from Apple through licensing similar patents from Microsoft, or at least something to fall back on if Apple won and they couldn't sell Android phones anymore.
More and more, its looking like Steve Jobs was right (albeit for the wrong reasons) about Flash. HTML 5 is capable of replacing Flash in 95% of cases and in almost all of those cases provides better performance and accessibility. Ending the web's dependence on Flash is a lot like ending dependence on foreign energy.
A better question is whether or not it will actually decrease copyright infringement. I can't speak for everyone, but I can't ever think of a time that I was typing in the name of some artist, movie, television show, book, etc. that I ever clicked on the auto-completed torrent link. If I really wanted a torrent, I'd just type in the full search term, but honestly I wouldn't even be searching on Google as I'm already aware of any number of sites where I could find what I was looking for.
I don't believe that a large number of would-be pirates got their start be clicking on an auto-complete because they were curious about what a torrent was. I'm also not sure how often people misclick on results either, so I would say the number of people getting trojans, viruses, etc. from this is probably much less than a ton, especially considering they could easily verify that they clicked on the wrong search term before actually visiting any of those sites.
Sounds like an utterly pointless change made to placate the *AA's of the world who are actually stupid enough to believe that this will put an end to piracy.
We really can't say as we haven't exactly stopped off to visit other parts of the universe to see what they're like. Everything we assume is horribly anecdotal. What makes sense for Earth doesn't necessarily have to make sense for any number of other worlds where life has sprung up. With so much potential variety across the universe there're bound to be all kinds of things that don't make any sense. We're not special because we're probably only one of some uncountable number of exceptions.
Tell that to the man who had an axe smash into his head through no fault of another man that clearly that can not happen. Tell the hungry wolf he can't possibly eat you, for you have a right to life. Tell the waves not to drown you as your natural rights surely prevent them from doing so.
Your rights exist because society collectively agrees that they do and enforces violations. In reality they exist to the extent that you're willing to defend them and if necessary die for them. Look no further than the actions of the TSA to see exactly how much your rights are worth.
It's more likely that the reason is profitability on these consoles. Other than Nintendo who released a comparatively less powerful device that was largely an evolution of the technology used in their previous generation console, Sony and Microsoft sunk a lot of money into developing the consoles and then heavily subsidized the initial costs of the devices in order to sell more of them. Microsoft also took a big hit due to quality issues with the initial version of the console which had a high failure rate due to design or manufacturing flaws.
There's no way either Sony or Microsoft could afford to release another console at this point. They both threw a lot of money at trying to beat each other without any success on either side. Microsoft could easily keep pouring money down the Xbox pit, but eventually investors will want the venture to show a profit. Sony's little empire has been eroding on all sides and they can't commit the resources to release a new console so they're stuck as well. Nintendo doesn't seem to care and it content selling Wii's for what must be a fairly ludicrous profit at this point.
Nintendo it likely to be the first to release something new, but I don't foresee them following in Microsoft or Sony's strategy. They'll probably release something comparable to the Xbox 360 or PS3 and price it such that they profit from each device sold. This would also put them in a position where more third party games can be ported to the system without a degradation in quality.
Sony and Microsoft are likely to stick with this generation for at least another two years. It probably depends how well Kinect and Move end up doing in the market. They both seem to have done better than I expected so it could be three or more years. Once they start to fall flat I imagine that they'll start moving towards something new. But they're in this position because they spent a lot of money to be the best, only to end up getting blindsided by Nintendo who realized that the game Sony and Microsoft were playing would be suicide.
Yes, device sales can be up, but that doesn't mean it's not losing market share. iPhone sales were up year-on-year, but they still dropped in overall share because Android was up even more year-on-year. I even question how many of those people "choose" a Symbian phone. I'd wager that several would prefer an Android phone or iPhone, but lack of availability or affordability prevents them from doing it. Apple will probably maintain the price of the iPhone, but I can easily see the prices of Android devices coming down over the next few years and completely destroying Symbian in that market segment.
Low market share works best when it's the most highly profitable portion of the market, something which Apple has been known to target. Nokia, however, isn't looking as good. Their stock was around $40 in 2007. It's down to $10 now. They may be selling a lot of phones, but they're not making a lot of money off of them and they're mostly stuck in a segment of the market that will eventually go away.
Even if Symbian yields better battery life (And ignoring all other disadvantages of running Symbian instead of Android or iOS.) eventually the battery life on iPhones and Android phones becomes good enough so that any additional capacity doesn't matter for 95% of consumers. iPhones and certain Android phones can already go for an entire day with moderate to heavy use. The battery only needs to last long enough such that it doesn't need to be recharged at an inconvenient time.
Nokia needs to make sure that MeeGo is a big hit and has at least a portion of the success that the iOS and Android operating systems have had, especially with developers. Otherwise they're sitting on another failed platform and will be so far out of the game that they may have to start using Android or Windows Phone 7.
Even if the standard of living hasn't increased terribly much since 1970, I'd still prefer living in today's world. Our lives are significantly better through technology that didn't exist 40 years ago. Cars are safer for occupants, there are new medical treatments, phones have more computational power than supercomputers back in the day, and the internet connects the world like never before.
The world is only capable of producing so much wealth and now that parts of the world other than the west are modernizing, the citizens of those countries are wanting their share of the pie. It's hard to compete and maintain high standards of living when someone else is willing to do whatever it is that you do for a lot cheaper.
If we want to increase the standard of living for the average person we can do a few things: Reduce the global population, increase the standard of living in the places where it is lowest in order to close the gaps, and continue to invest heavily in technology. The first increases the average standard of living simply because there are so many fewer people to drag it down. The second removes imbalances in the global economy that lead to massive outsourcing and rapid erosion in local living standards. The third ensures that the amount of wealth produced by the average person will continue to grow.
I'm not calling for some form of egalitarian society or socialist paradise, merely a world in which free market forces are not able to react in such a volatile manner. Eventually the world will produce enough wealth such that it can support a higher population, but right now its impossible for everyone in the world to have a 1970's US-style standard of living.
Either you're being incredibly facetious or you're completely crazy. He eventually turned a deal where he lead the police to his wife's body as part of the deal. The evidence up to that point was pretty damning, but I believe that being able to locate the body should remove any remaining doubt as to his guilt.
Hate to reply to myself, but here's an earlier article from when the incident occurred. The article states: "The problem, which has been traced to a failure in the hard drive—" and "'The original real estate records HAVE NOT BEEN LOST,' Atkins said Thursday in a written statement." which suggests that it probably was a disk failure that wiped out at least the directory structure for the files or the index of the database in which the records were stored. So a "read-head crash" could be the actual culprit, but is probably outside the understanding of most of the readership of the site so it was shortened to "crash", something which is much more understandable to most people.
Might just be calling it a "crash" so that almost anyone can understand that the computer is borked and you can't get the data out. It's a lot like how most people will say they have a computer "virus" when it could be a trojan or a worm. It's a catch-all term that everyone, even non-technical people, can understand fairly easily. Even if you've never used a computer, you can at least associate it with a car crash and come away with the conclusion that something bad has happened.
Based on TFA, it sounds like it could have been a hard disk read-head crash that took out the directory structure. So in that sense, a "crash" could erase data. Either way, makes it easier for the general public to understand.
Slashdot Mirror
"Like when the 20 dollar and hour consultant put me out of my 90 and hour gig.
There was probably a valid reason for that.
Consultants are usually shitheads?
The performance is most certainly larger than 5% (Consider that it can have upwards of 50% performance improvement over the 470 which was launched earlier this year.), but you fail to consider that this performance will be delivered for fewer watts, saving power both in and of itself and through the reduced need for cooling. Benchmarks from AnandTech show that Crysis will give this card a workout when played at 2560 x 1600 with high settings, so it's somewhat disingenuous to claim that there's nothing out there that will tax this card. It's definitely a card for enthusiast gamers who want to use the highest resolutions and graphics settings so it's definitely not something the mainstream will care about.
The new cards also have significant compute advantages compared to previous generation cards. The 570 has 4x the performance of a 285 in some benchmarks. The 285 came out less than two years ago and cost significantly more at the time of release. OpenCL is allowing graphics cards the opportunity to do a lot of things other than just 3D rendering. For some workflows, investing in these powerful graphics cards is a lot better than buying better CPUs.
I understand the point you're trying to make here, but please understand that in the real world otherwise intelligent people with a decent amount of common sense will behave like complete morons when put in front of a computer. For whatever reason they imagine that it's some kind of magic box and don't understand the damage that they can do to themselves with it.
Some will send their life savings to the prince of Nigeria; a few will open hotnude.jpg.exe, unleashing god knows what horrors on the machine; others will share all sorts of information that they probably shouldn't with phishers; more still will post pictures or comments in manners that could cost them a job or ruin a career;
People have these wonderful devices that they use without really understanding the dangers involved or the consequences of their actions. Protecting these people from themselves is a good thing and it's a partly why Apple is having money-fight Fridays every week. It's not really a jail if there's an easily accessible way out of it. Most people are probably better off in the comfort of the confined area. Anyone who's feeling adventurous or understands the risks can easily leave that area.
MS isn't being altruistic about this at all. It's a direct shot at Google, most specifically targeting how Google generates revenue. If they really wanted to turn the heat up, they could ship the browser with an ad blocker as well. Microsoft has finally realized that it's not going to unseat Google. If they can't have that money, why not deprive Google of it as well?
If the strategy worked ideally, it would demolish Google's revenues because they're unable to collect information about users and their ads aren't being seen by as many eyeballs. That's Google's bread and butter business right there. The reason for the existence of both Android and Chrome OS is to prevent this kind of lockout from happening. Android isn't completely under Google's control so it is possible to lock them out (See the Android phone that uses Bing for search and stories about Verizon possibly considering replacing the Android Marketplace with their own store.) if various third parties wanted to, but Chrome OS seems to be under Google's control to a larger extent at this point.
Google is smart and they realize that their position is open to attack, which is part of the reason they've been expanding into so many other areas and will continue to look for new ways to expose customers to their ads or gather information about users that can be used for targeted advertisements.
The declaratory judgment move was basically Motorola suing itself over Apple patents in order to prove those patents invalid or non-infringed.
The madness of this patent mess never ceases to amaze me.
This troll has been appearing a lot recently. There's no mention of that phrase in TFA, not that anyone's actually read it.
The benefit to open source is that if they get too evil, we can always fork the project and build in the tracking prevention. He'll we don't even have to wait for them to get evil.
That's only because those other mediums couldn't/can't track users like the Internet can. If they could, they'd have already been doing it for ages.
It's not, but saying you're the new lemonade stand is not as enticing to potential investors. It's got to be the next dimension or a new paradigm. That's when the venture capital starts to flow.
That would totally explain why Motorola sued Apple first. No, wait, it wouldn't at all. Nokia also took the first swing in that scuffle as well. The only large recent suit where Apple instigated matters was against HTC. I don't think things are quite the way you paint them to be. This is all likely to end in one big cross-licensing deal where the established players carve out there own share of the market pie and keep anyone else from joining the party.
I don't know which patents Apple counter-sued with, but some are probably the same as the HTC lawsuit. Apple probably would have gone after Motorola in the future, especially if they won the HTC suit. The fact that they've just now tacked on more patents suggests that Motorola may have blindsided them a little.
The most interesting result in all of these disputes is when HTC settled with Microsoft. I don't know the details of the settlement, but it was reported that HTC would pay Microsoft for every phone sold, even the Android phones. Maybe they wanted protection from Apple through licensing similar patents from Microsoft, or at least something to fall back on if Apple won and they couldn't sell Android phones anymore.
Where in Stregano's post is there anything about negative bars on the phone,s signal strength meter?
More and more, its looking like Steve Jobs was right (albeit for the wrong reasons) about Flash. HTML 5 is capable of replacing Flash in 95% of cases and in almost all of those cases provides better performance and accessibility. Ending the web's dependence on Flash is a lot like ending dependence on foreign energy.
Tell them to leave my cows out of this!
A better question is whether or not it will actually decrease copyright infringement. I can't speak for everyone, but I can't ever think of a time that I was typing in the name of some artist, movie, television show, book, etc. that I ever clicked on the auto-completed torrent link. If I really wanted a torrent, I'd just type in the full search term, but honestly I wouldn't even be searching on Google as I'm already aware of any number of sites where I could find what I was looking for.
I don't believe that a large number of would-be pirates got their start be clicking on an auto-complete because they were curious about what a torrent was. I'm also not sure how often people misclick on results either, so I would say the number of people getting trojans, viruses, etc. from this is probably much less than a ton, especially considering they could easily verify that they clicked on the wrong search term before actually visiting any of those sites.
Sounds like an utterly pointless change made to placate the *AA's of the world who are actually stupid enough to believe that this will put an end to piracy.
We really can't say as we haven't exactly stopped off to visit other parts of the universe to see what they're like. Everything we assume is horribly anecdotal. What makes sense for Earth doesn't necessarily have to make sense for any number of other worlds where life has sprung up. With so much potential variety across the universe there're bound to be all kinds of things that don't make any sense. We're not special because we're probably only one of some uncountable number of exceptions.
Tell that to the man who had an axe smash into his head through no fault of another man that clearly that can not happen. Tell the hungry wolf he can't possibly eat you, for you have a right to life. Tell the waves not to drown you as your natural rights surely prevent them from doing so.
Your rights exist because society collectively agrees that they do and enforces violations. In reality they exist to the extent that you're willing to defend them and if necessary die for them. Look no further than the actions of the TSA to see exactly how much your rights are worth.
It's more likely that the reason is profitability on these consoles. Other than Nintendo who released a comparatively less powerful device that was largely an evolution of the technology used in their previous generation console, Sony and Microsoft sunk a lot of money into developing the consoles and then heavily subsidized the initial costs of the devices in order to sell more of them. Microsoft also took a big hit due to quality issues with the initial version of the console which had a high failure rate due to design or manufacturing flaws.
There's no way either Sony or Microsoft could afford to release another console at this point. They both threw a lot of money at trying to beat each other without any success on either side. Microsoft could easily keep pouring money down the Xbox pit, but eventually investors will want the venture to show a profit. Sony's little empire has been eroding on all sides and they can't commit the resources to release a new console so they're stuck as well. Nintendo doesn't seem to care and it content selling Wii's for what must be a fairly ludicrous profit at this point.
Nintendo it likely to be the first to release something new, but I don't foresee them following in Microsoft or Sony's strategy. They'll probably release something comparable to the Xbox 360 or PS3 and price it such that they profit from each device sold. This would also put them in a position where more third party games can be ported to the system without a degradation in quality.
Sony and Microsoft are likely to stick with this generation for at least another two years. It probably depends how well Kinect and Move end up doing in the market. They both seem to have done better than I expected so it could be three or more years. Once they start to fall flat I imagine that they'll start moving towards something new. But they're in this position because they spent a lot of money to be the best, only to end up getting blindsided by Nintendo who realized that the game Sony and Microsoft were playing would be suicide.
Yes, device sales can be up, but that doesn't mean it's not losing market share. iPhone sales were up year-on-year, but they still dropped in overall share because Android was up even more year-on-year. I even question how many of those people "choose" a Symbian phone. I'd wager that several would prefer an Android phone or iPhone, but lack of availability or affordability prevents them from doing it. Apple will probably maintain the price of the iPhone, but I can easily see the prices of Android devices coming down over the next few years and completely destroying Symbian in that market segment.
Low market share works best when it's the most highly profitable portion of the market, something which Apple has been known to target. Nokia, however, isn't looking as good. Their stock was around $40 in 2007. It's down to $10 now. They may be selling a lot of phones, but they're not making a lot of money off of them and they're mostly stuck in a segment of the market that will eventually go away.
Even if Symbian yields better battery life (And ignoring all other disadvantages of running Symbian instead of Android or iOS.) eventually the battery life on iPhones and Android phones becomes good enough so that any additional capacity doesn't matter for 95% of consumers. iPhones and certain Android phones can already go for an entire day with moderate to heavy use. The battery only needs to last long enough such that it doesn't need to be recharged at an inconvenient time.
Nokia needs to make sure that MeeGo is a big hit and has at least a portion of the success that the iOS and Android operating systems have had, especially with developers. Otherwise they're sitting on another failed platform and will be so far out of the game that they may have to start using Android or Windows Phone 7.
Actually, it reminds me of the Courier that Microsoft was rumored to be developing. Here's a concept video for anyone not familiar with the device.
This thing would just be a lot larger, and probably not as flexible, but it's similar.
Even if the standard of living hasn't increased terribly much since 1970, I'd still prefer living in today's world. Our lives are significantly better through technology that didn't exist 40 years ago. Cars are safer for occupants, there are new medical treatments, phones have more computational power than supercomputers back in the day, and the internet connects the world like never before.
The world is only capable of producing so much wealth and now that parts of the world other than the west are modernizing, the citizens of those countries are wanting their share of the pie. It's hard to compete and maintain high standards of living when someone else is willing to do whatever it is that you do for a lot cheaper.
If we want to increase the standard of living for the average person we can do a few things: Reduce the global population, increase the standard of living in the places where it is lowest in order to close the gaps, and continue to invest heavily in technology. The first increases the average standard of living simply because there are so many fewer people to drag it down. The second removes imbalances in the global economy that lead to massive outsourcing and rapid erosion in local living standards. The third ensures that the amount of wealth produced by the average person will continue to grow.
I'm not calling for some form of egalitarian society or socialist paradise, merely a world in which free market forces are not able to react in such a volatile manner. Eventually the world will produce enough wealth such that it can support a higher population, but right now its impossible for everyone in the world to have a 1970's US-style standard of living.
Either you're being incredibly facetious or you're completely crazy. He eventually turned a deal where he lead the police to his wife's body as part of the deal. The evidence up to that point was pretty damning, but I believe that being able to locate the body should remove any remaining doubt as to his guilt.
Article says it's the Orleans Parish Civil District Court that's had the problems so they're not exactly a business.
Hate to reply to myself, but here's an earlier article from when the incident occurred. The article states: "The problem, which has been traced to a failure in the hard drive—" and "'The original real estate records HAVE NOT BEEN LOST,' Atkins said Thursday in a written statement." which suggests that it probably was a disk failure that wiped out at least the directory structure for the files or the index of the database in which the records were stored. So a "read-head crash" could be the actual culprit, but is probably outside the understanding of most of the readership of the site so it was shortened to "crash", something which is much more understandable to most people.
Might just be calling it a "crash" so that almost anyone can understand that the computer is borked and you can't get the data out. It's a lot like how most people will say they have a computer "virus" when it could be a trojan or a worm. It's a catch-all term that everyone, even non-technical people, can understand fairly easily. Even if you've never used a computer, you can at least associate it with a car crash and come away with the conclusion that something bad has happened.
Based on TFA, it sounds like it could have been a hard disk read-head crash that took out the directory structure. So in that sense, a "crash" could erase data. Either way, makes it easier for the general public to understand.