breathlessly waiting for the announcement confirming life on another planet because they believe that will be the final triumph of science over God.
nah. the gods won't care and the scientists are probably going to tire quickly of any conversation of science vs gods.
What will be interesting is the impact of that kind of discovery on day to day religious life. Things like "God shaped man in his image and likeness" (Gen. 2.7) will look out of place if weird looking aliens are found. More so if the aliens hold a similar belief about alien-shaped gods.
Actually, if the sales numbers are to be believed, people just aren't buying new PCs at all.
Except for RAM, the vast majority of PC users will never fully max out their machine. They won't even get close to what the CPU can do.
That's an interesting point which does not seem to hold up when I read Slashdot. It looks to me that there are 2 conflicting generalisations: 1) the vast majority of users does not max ou their 5 year old PCs 2) all application and web development these days uses too much of all PC available, especially if you use Firefox, Javascript, antivirus and all the bloatware that is pre-installed on new PCs.
So which one is it?
The way I see it, the iPad and Macbook Air show what PCs could optimise in terms of performance: use SSD, use smaller apps (iOS) and and use app markets to offer an easy way for software developers to make sales.
That's the opposite of what happens with the more conventional PC market with laptop computers. A well stocked shop can have laptops with 5 different screen sizes, 20 different CPUs and a varity of HDD sizes, but only a small minority of high end machines have SSDs. If HDDs became secondary storage or more manufacturers accepted to start their price range a bit above the current levels, then there would be more conventional PCs "feeling" fast. As things are, people are paying more for less CPU power, getting crude applications, spending money on subscriptions and still can claim that the iPad/Android tablet is faster than a similarly priced PC. And they're not wrong.
Well, incompatible as they may be, I find that most of the apps I like and need exist on Windows Store as ARM and x86 compatible. I don't have a RT machine to try them, but assume that someone has already bothered to compile apps for both architectures, otherwise they wouldn't show on the Store as compatible.
It's a risky generalisation, but I think that right now what's missing from Windows Store is the kind of social networking apps that are IPO-oriented and exist by the dozens for iOS and Android. They are great for showing how popular and hot an app ecosystem is, but in general I don't see what they'll turn into once an investor demands that some sort of money will have to come out of the user base.
Hi, I'm not the OP, I'm one of the other 4 people outside of MS who likes Metro. I find it much more elegant than what I used before, which was a start menu with too many icons, leading me to have a dozen usual shortcuts on the desktop itself. That "desktop" way of using the computer also lead me to keeping a bunch of current documents on the desktop folder, which required regularly cleaning up. Soon enough I fall behind on those tidying up chores and start dropping everything in a folder just to hide the mess when I present at customers.
With Windows 8 Metro, I just store everything in the right library folders and it gets indexed for quick finding and retrieving. The Start screen shows me useful stuff before I start any application. The UI guidelines for Metro are suitable for simplified apps, which are a welcome improvement over having everything and the kitchen sink on the main screen, plus an Advanced Settings tab. Programmers can dislike web designers as much as they like, but the fact is that "Apps", Apple style, did offer improvement over what is still common in the "PC" world.
In parallel, I find it that the Windows Store is a good replacement for relying on Google search results to decide what to install on my PC when I need something new. Do a search for [some application name] APK and see the same old crap happening with Android apps. On balance, I think app stores are a good thing.
I got Windows 8.0 soon after it was released, as a cheap upgrade to Windows 7. I think it compares well to what Apple did with OS X and iLife a few years ago. It works fine and the account sync across devices is a really nice to have. So much, that Firefox had it before for a much smaller scope of use.
Recently, I asked my company to upgrade W7 to W8 on my work laptop (Mods: "+ 1, Funny"). Since there are work-related restrictions in relation to the use of MS accounts, I find tha I'm using only part of what W8 offers. Unsurprisingly, I have to fight MS apps on occasion and it is kind of accomodating in relation to signing on to separate applications with or without the Windows account. On my home PC, I leave more settings with their defaults on and overall it's more comfortable to use.
The key thing is that Windows is no longer just an OS that sits in your PC. It is an OS + applications + a bunch of online services so that it competes with the equivalent from Apple and Google. I understand that/.rs would like stuff to be like in the old days, but that's not what the market says: PC sales are dropping and tablets/smartphones are selling more in its place. Folks at Microsoft would be stupid to drop Windows Metro + online services just to please the "desktop" users. I think that it won't take long until we accept that the "PC market" is not separate from the smartdevice market, leading to about 25% of PCs sold being OS X/iOS; 25% with Android/Chrome and Wintel devices will have something like 40%, with a tendency to go down.
1) no problem, I'll set up a reminder for December 2014 and check if my prediction is right. 2) and 3) I have the impression that everything that is pointed out as being bad about Windows 8 and RT is what people like about iOS and Android (it boils down to simplicity and low price tags on apps and subscriptions). Hence my prediction that if (or when) Apple makes an "iPad Pro" to go along the Air; it will run iOS; it will be built for touch first; it will have an app store as the only way to add software and it will be "DRM-compliant" in a variety of ways. Today, you can get the Surface RT with that kind of features but people dislike it because it's not sufficiently alike the PC they already have.
1)/.rs will moan about Windows 8 Start Screen even with the majority of sold laptops carrying a touch screen 2)/.rs will dismiss Windows RT as being worse than all Windows and mobile OSs put together 3) Apple releases a 12" iPad (iOS, not OS X), buyers will get keyboards for it and everyone will say it is the best PC ever.
By keeping himself in the minds of the global population he adds incentive to those protecting him; they get to be the 'good guy' by doing so
I believe that this needs to be supported by the people in general, rather than Snowden single-handedly having to provide that incentive. I think Snowden needs to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize or something similar.
Apart from the exit strategy lottery thing, there is the issue of ongoing costs. Since the app is free, the users don't pay per use or as subscription and there's no sponsor... who's paying for Snapchat to exist? At some point the investors will want their money back. As it is today, I don't even see how they cover running costs.
I agree, at least in part. I don't know about Vista being generally unstable, but I remember it felt slow. I remember that when XP was released, it was common for PCs to have 256MB or less of RAM. When people stopped moaning about how bloated XP was, it was because they already had replaced their PCs of 2000/01 with something that had 1 or 2GB or RAM, as well as CPUs and graphics cards that were much better. SATA interfaces for their HDD also pushed the performance up considerably. With XP "surviving" 1 or 2 hardware upgrades, it's only natural that it felt super-fast. With whatever optimisation and bug fixing they did at MS, W7 was indeed faster than Vista. However, the perceived performance gains were certainly affected by having more RAM, which had become significantly cheaper. I'd be surprised to hear about people buying computers in 2009 that had W7 running on 1GB (or less).
Aero was eye candy and a very much needed update at a time when Windows UI was looking tremendously dated compared to OS X and a variety of Linux distros. If they had not made Aero, they would have had to make something else to replace the UI of the 90's.
This is such bullshit! In the alternative universe where Windows 7 was ready on the day Vista came out, software drivers for W7 would have been as unavailable as they were for Vista. All sorts of software that required users to have full admin permissions would have been broken by W7 UAC as it was by Vista's UAC. All PCs sold with 512MB or 1GB RAM would have still be slow compared to XP.
Only 1 or 2 years down the line when OEMs had caught up and released proper drivers, when PCs were being sold with 2GB+ RAM and when people learned to separate normal from admin users did Windows Vista/7/8 become less of a nuisance. It had very little to do with Windows 7 being so awesome.
OK, so I could buy a Roku device and hope that the functionality they added remains active; or I can buy an Android-based media box and just get media apps from the different TV channels/netflix/whatever.
I still may get shafted but the general rule is that if it runs on Android, it should run on my box, right? For everything else on the LAN, XBMC runs on Android.
Other than avoiding dodgy power supplies from nameless manufacturers, I don't see why I should get a Roku instead of a nameless Android media box.
I see them on sale in the UK and they are sold as smartphones in general, rather than cheap but respectable. I think sometimes people don't notice that this is a market that is growing a lot, has a lot of potential for more people to buy devices and apps and the market can still change radically from one year to the next. Just because Nokia and Microsoft were late to launch something that compares well to iPhones does not mean that as of 2013 it's all hopeless for them. There's plenty of people in the whole world who are in the market their 1st or 2nd smartphone and/or are not deeply committed to iOS or Android.
Now if Apple decided to go loco and sell a truly low end device, similar to what they did with the 5c but for £200 unlocked, then it would turn the market upside down... again.
The Peugeot 3008 hybrid powers the front wheels with a 2.0 HDI (diesel) engine and the rear wheels with an electric motor. The diesel engine powers the battery as well so it can work all EV for a limited range.
You know, the total cost of ownership may make a lot of sense but there are differences in terms of affording a better car, be it EV or not.
If I take the starting price of the EV car and compare with he starting price of my used Peugeot + fuel, they break even after a few years. The difference is that if I lose my job or if there is any other significant change, I can just stop paying for more fuel for the Peugeot, keep it off the road and stop the insurance until I'm back on my feet. The Nissan Leaf I compared with still has a monthly price for the battery rental and/or for financing the initial purchase.
I can't make considerations about the compared maintenance costs, other than there's plenty of mechanics out there who deal with Peugeot 206, while the alleged low maintenance costs of the EVs are based on the reduction of the number of moving parts. Who can maintain them and at what price when something does go wrong?
As of 2013 I think that the EVs are like many other high tech devices, good for those who have enough money to be early adopters. For me, maybe my next car will be a used hybrid. It will take me more than 1 car lifetime (mine are 5 because I buy old cars for £2500) before I can take the plunge and go a bit more upmarket.
Slashdot Mirror
There's quite a lot you can do with Facebook pages, and a lot of people will already have username/pwd there.
OK. so it's kind of possible but not very good.. Thanks for taking the time to explain.
breathlessly waiting for the announcement confirming life on another planet because they believe that will be the final triumph of science over God.
nah. the gods won't care and the scientists are probably going to tire quickly of any conversation of science vs gods.
What will be interesting is the impact of that kind of discovery on day to day religious life. Things like "God shaped man in his image and likeness" (Gen. 2.7) will look out of place if weird looking aliens are found. More so if the aliens hold a similar belief about alien-shaped gods.
A 1000 square foot flat-roof house could support up to 111 solar panels for 22kWh per day
Hmmm... is there any chance of making transparent panels so that they could be piled up rathen than requiring more and more building area?
Living on that great star? Some important steps have already been taken to achieve that goal!
http://waterfordwhispersnews.c...
[North Korea lands first man on the sun]
Actually, if the sales numbers are to be believed, people just aren't buying new PCs at all.
Except for RAM, the vast majority of PC users will never fully max out their machine. They won't even get close to what the CPU can do.
That's an interesting point which does not seem to hold up when I read Slashdot. It looks to me that there are 2 conflicting generalisations:
1) the vast majority of users does not max ou their 5 year old PCs
2) all application and web development these days uses too much of all PC available, especially if you use Firefox, Javascript, antivirus and all the bloatware that is pre-installed on new PCs.
So which one is it?
The way I see it, the iPad and Macbook Air show what PCs could optimise in terms of performance: use SSD, use smaller apps (iOS) and and use app markets to offer an easy way for software developers to make sales.
That's the opposite of what happens with the more conventional PC market with laptop computers. A well stocked shop can have laptops with 5 different screen sizes, 20 different CPUs and a varity of HDD sizes, but only a small minority of high end machines have SSDs. If HDDs became secondary storage or more manufacturers accepted to start their price range a bit above the current levels, then there would be more conventional PCs "feeling" fast.
As things are, people are paying more for less CPU power, getting crude applications, spending money on subscriptions and still can claim that the iPad/Android tablet is faster than a similarly priced PC. And they're not wrong.
Well, incompatible as they may be, I find that most of the apps I like and need exist on Windows Store as ARM and x86 compatible. I don't have a RT machine to try them, but assume that someone has already bothered to compile apps for both architectures, otherwise they wouldn't show on the Store as compatible.
It's a risky generalisation, but I think that right now what's missing from Windows Store is the kind of social networking apps that are IPO-oriented and exist by the dozens for iOS and Android. They are great for showing how popular and hot an app ecosystem is, but in general I don't see what they'll turn into once an investor demands that some sort of money will have to come out of the user base.
Hi, I'm not the OP, I'm one of the other 4 people outside of MS who likes Metro.
I find it much more elegant than what I used before, which was a start menu with too many icons, leading me to have a dozen usual shortcuts on the desktop itself. That "desktop" way of using the computer also lead me to keeping a bunch of current documents on the desktop folder, which required regularly cleaning up. Soon enough I fall behind on those tidying up chores and start dropping everything in a folder just to hide the mess when I present at customers.
With Windows 8 Metro, I just store everything in the right library folders and it gets indexed for quick finding and retrieving. The Start screen shows me useful stuff before I start any application. The UI guidelines for Metro are suitable for simplified apps, which are a welcome improvement over having everything and the kitchen sink on the main screen, plus an Advanced Settings tab. Programmers can dislike web designers as much as they like, but the fact is that "Apps", Apple style, did offer improvement over what is still common in the "PC" world.
In parallel, I find it that the Windows Store is a good replacement for relying on Google search results to decide what to install on my PC when I need something new. Do a search for [some application name] APK and see the same old crap happening with Android apps. On balance, I think app stores are a good thing.
I got Windows 8.0 soon after it was released, as a cheap upgrade to Windows 7. I think it compares well to what Apple did with OS X and iLife a few years ago. It works fine and the account sync across devices is a really nice to have. So much, that Firefox had it before for a much smaller scope of use.
Recently, I asked my company to upgrade W7 to W8 on my work laptop (Mods: "+ 1, Funny"). Since there are work-related restrictions in relation to the use of MS accounts, I find tha I'm using only part of what W8 offers. Unsurprisingly, I have to fight MS apps on occasion and it is kind of accomodating in relation to signing on to separate applications with or without the Windows account. On my home PC, I leave more settings with their defaults on and overall it's more comfortable to use.
The key thing is that Windows is no longer just an OS that sits in your PC. It is an OS + applications + a bunch of online services so that it competes with the equivalent from Apple and Google. I understand that /.rs would like stuff to be like in the old days, but that's not what the market says: PC sales are dropping and tablets/smartphones are selling more in its place. Folks at Microsoft would be stupid to drop Windows Metro + online services just to please the "desktop" users. I think that it won't take long until we accept that the "PC market" is not separate from the smartdevice market, leading to about 25% of PCs sold being OS X/iOS; 25% with Android/Chrome and Wintel devices will have something like 40%, with a tendency to go down.
1) no problem, I'll set up a reminder for December 2014 and check if my prediction is right.
2) and 3) I have the impression that everything that is pointed out as being bad about Windows 8 and RT is what people like about iOS and Android (it boils down to simplicity and low price tags on apps and subscriptions). Hence my prediction that if (or when) Apple makes an "iPad Pro" to go along the Air; it will run iOS; it will be built for touch first; it will have an app store as the only way to add software and it will be "DRM-compliant" in a variety of ways. Today, you can get the Surface RT with that kind of features but people dislike it because it's not sufficiently alike the PC they already have.
As of January 3rd they do not, but I predict that throughout 2014 they will.
here goes:
1) /.rs will moan about Windows 8 Start Screen even with the majority of sold laptops carrying a touch screen /.rs will dismiss Windows RT as being worse than all Windows and mobile OSs put together
2)
3) Apple releases a 12" iPad (iOS, not OS X), buyers will get keyboards for it and everyone will say it is the best PC ever.
By keeping himself in the minds of the global population he adds incentive to those protecting him; they get to be the 'good guy' by doing so
I believe that this needs to be supported by the people in general, rather than Snowden single-handedly having to provide that incentive. I think Snowden needs to be nominated for a Nobel Peace Prize or something similar.
exactly. Another reasons is because parents and teachers have made twitter and facebook too mainstream for teenage taste.
Apart from the exit strategy lottery thing, there is the issue of ongoing costs.
Since the app is free, the users don't pay per use or as subscription and there's no sponsor... who's paying for Snapchat to exist? At some point the investors will want their money back. As it is today, I don't even see how they cover running costs.
I agree, at least in part. I don't know about Vista being generally unstable, but I remember it felt slow. I remember that when XP was released, it was common for PCs to have 256MB or less of RAM. When people stopped moaning about how bloated XP was, it was because they already had replaced their PCs of 2000/01 with something that had 1 or 2GB or RAM, as well as CPUs and graphics cards that were much better. SATA interfaces for their HDD also pushed the performance up considerably. With XP "surviving" 1 or 2 hardware upgrades, it's only natural that it felt super-fast.
With whatever optimisation and bug fixing they did at MS, W7 was indeed faster than Vista. However, the perceived performance gains were certainly affected by having more RAM, which had become significantly cheaper. I'd be surprised to hear about people buying computers in 2009 that had W7 running on 1GB (or less).
this stupid thing nobody cared about called Aero.
Aero was eye candy and a very much needed update at a time when Windows UI was looking tremendously dated compared to OS X and a variety of Linux distros. If they had not made Aero, they would have had to make something else to replace the UI of the 90's.
If Vista had been more like Windows 7
This is such bullshit! In the alternative universe where Windows 7 was ready on the day Vista came out, software drivers for W7 would have been as unavailable as they were for Vista. All sorts of software that required users to have full admin permissions would have been broken by W7 UAC as it was by Vista's UAC. All PCs sold with 512MB or 1GB RAM would have still be slow compared to XP.
Only 1 or 2 years down the line when OEMs had caught up and released proper drivers, when PCs were being sold with 2GB+ RAM and when people learned to separate normal from admin users did Windows Vista/7/8 become less of a nuisance. It had very little to do with Windows 7 being so awesome.
OK, so I could buy a Roku device and hope that the functionality they added remains active;
or I can buy an Android-based media box and just get media apps from the different TV channels/netflix/whatever.
I still may get shafted but the general rule is that if it runs on Android, it should run on my box, right? For everything else on the LAN, XBMC runs on Android.
Other than avoiding dodgy power supplies from nameless manufacturers, I don't see why I should get a Roku instead of a nameless Android media box.
I see them on sale in the UK and they are sold as smartphones in general, rather than cheap but respectable. I think sometimes people don't notice that this is a market that is growing a lot, has a lot of potential for more people to buy devices and apps and the market can still change radically from one year to the next.
Just because Nokia and Microsoft were late to launch something that compares well to iPhones does not mean that as of 2013 it's all hopeless for them. There's plenty of people in the whole world who are in the market their 1st or 2nd smartphone and/or are not deeply committed to iOS or Android.
Now if Apple decided to go loco and sell a truly low end device, similar to what they did with the 5c but for £200 unlocked, then it would turn the market upside down... again.
I am Tiger Woods.
auto-felch? hmmm, this thread is getting very technical. I'll check in the dictionary what felching means.
erm... OK... no chance I'll be buying this car!
yes, but do they run linux?
I'd go for a mix of 2, 3 and fear of being hit in the head with bombs.
The Peugeot 3008 hybrid powers the front wheels with a 2.0 HDI (diesel) engine and the rear wheels with an electric motor. The diesel engine powers the battery as well so it can work all EV for a limited range.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdqjuYMqtvI
This HDI engine is used by Peugeot, Citroen, Ford and Mini (BMW).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSA_HDi_engine
It's not a truck but shows that it can be done and sold by Ford.
You know, the total cost of ownership may make a lot of sense but there are differences in terms of affording a better car, be it EV or not.
If I take the starting price of the EV car and compare with he starting price of my used Peugeot + fuel, they break even after a few years. The difference is that if I lose my job or if there is any other significant change, I can just stop paying for more fuel for the Peugeot, keep it off the road and stop the insurance until I'm back on my feet. The Nissan Leaf I compared with still has a monthly price for the battery rental and/or for financing the initial purchase.
I can't make considerations about the compared maintenance costs, other than there's plenty of mechanics out there who deal with Peugeot 206, while the alleged low maintenance costs of the EVs are based on the reduction of the number of moving parts. Who can maintain them and at what price when something does go wrong?
As of 2013 I think that the EVs are like many other high tech devices, good for those who have enough money to be early adopters. For me, maybe my next car will be a used hybrid. It will take me more than 1 car lifetime (mine are 5 because I buy old cars for £2500) before I can take the plunge and go a bit more upmarket.