The Intel GMA 950s have nothing to do with it. Apple has to include something sweet standard in the Mac Pro. Like a 7800 GT. A 1 GB RAM, 4 core 2.0 GHz 7800 GT computer for $2000 will scream "serious" to gamers. Similarly, the iMac could use a better card, like a X1600 XT (or an X1800 if the MP goes higher) instead of the smaller X1600 model. No one is gonna buy a Macbook or a Mini for gaming. period.
Nah, this stuff is getting pretty common. Look at stuff like hansofoundation.org lots of advertising is being done with strange internet based stuff. Remember MS's Origami stuff? So Google isn't alone in that.
>>Yes, but it's one game. Do you really expect the whole XP-using world to upgrade to Vista because of Halo 2?
No, but every MS-owned game will suddenly now require DX10 I bet. And they make a good number of games (more than I once thought) in a wide variety of genres. All it takes is one or two "must-play" games to get someone to upgrade to Vista.
From now until whenever Vista launches in H1 2007, we're going to see a lot of it everywhere. Like it or not, Windows is by far the dominant OS, and any rev obviously makes the news. Microsoft wants to try to be in the headlines as much as possible, so they're astroturfing like mad, trying to up positive discussion about Vista. This'll only get worse the next 6 months or so. The simple fact is that it's gonna be the same old stuff, because we knew all of Vista's tricks and twists a year or two ago. Some of them have been shelved or pushed back, but the point is that all of these "reviews" and articles are gonna look similar because there's been no new feature of Vista or rumor of a new feature for a while, and we're not expecting any. Any article about Vista is going to be someone's opinion of it and it's new "features". Start ignoring them, or counter-astroturfing.
Well, if my friends who know nothing about PCs are buying a comptuer, they'll look to their tech-inclined friends. I'll say get a Mac, but when they decide to go PC, I might say, get this line over that line, these Intel chips are better. Tech people have an influence in their non-tech friends/relatives purchases
It's a book review. Obviously it's talking about a specific book. And an interesting one at that. And encouraging OSS games. So don't fret about it. If you think book reviews are slashvertisements, then don't look at any of them.
I bet more people die due to accidental drowning while eating cereal. Or riding bikes. Or jumping rope.
Accidental drowning due to jumping rope? That's a leading cause of death, right behind heart disease, Chuck Norris, cancer, and Jack Bauer. Or have you gone looking up "facts" in a "book" again? Next time, ask your gut, not some dead tree.
Right now, content sites balance the price of bandwidth with the sale of ad space. They have to average more income from ad clicks than it costs them bandwidth. If they get hit with "Tiered Internet" costs, their costs go up, which means they either: A) Put more ads on the site B)Start charging money for formerly free services (like the stuff in GoogleLabs, or blogs costing money to rent), or C) Go out of business.
Whichever way it works out, the customer loses value or has to pay more. Therefore, this plan is bad for consumers.
Does it matter if they only get one exec? If they committed a crime to get the evidence, it is inadmissable. Then they have virtually no evidence, and a very shaky legal theory to go on (hosting torrents != hosting copyrighted files)
Very true. But whenever technology gets involved in a discussion, people's eyes sort of glaze over. No one knows what's going on, they just hear Internet phone calls, terrorism, and encryption. While you and I know that anyone intercepting a packet (encrypted or not) can tell where it came from and where it's going, America doesn't. They probably think it's an effort at parity between VOIP and normal phone calls (if they know what VOIP is).
"Your computer thinks you were trying to do something stupid. Your computer also thinks you never actually read these dialog boxes. Press "yes" if you agree, and you will be shown something that will make sure you NEVER blindly click "yes" again"
If goatse is involved, I trust that some users will, in fact, be doing their clicking blindly for the rest of their lives.
If the user buys a new PC Microsoft makes another OEM Vista license sale. Win - Win... well except the consumer that is.
MS makes more off of a retail sale. $200ish vs. $80-100. MS wants upgrades to be software-only (esp. since you'll have to get a new machine a few years later anyways.
My University simply calls it a campus-wide LAN which happens to connect to the Internet. They make no claims at being an ISP. That gives them more power, I think, and it'd let them out of this law.
If we could reduce spam, we'd hopefully reduce the "need" (or desire) for zombie computers, and thus decrease the number of trojans/viruses/worms. Zombies are useful for spam and DDOS, and cutting the spammers out of the picture cuts the number of new viruses trying to make botnets.
End users have been downloading large content for years now
No. Some geeky users have been using the Net for large transfers. Most people might be managing music sharing, but if IPTV or VOIP is going to be coming for the general public, then there could be an issue.
Filesharing is mostly illegal, and the stuff that isn't illegal (Linux) is for people who already can figure out how to do it. this results in a lack of documentation about filesharing and 1-2-3 guides to how to set it up (or a Geek Squad-esque group to do it), which means the general public that didn't go for filesharing will go for a legal streaming video system if there's an easy way to do it (for people who have issues with email)
So 100,000 birds in the hand are worth 20 in the bush?
I mean, note the word "potential". There are thousands of vulnerabilities that have been exploited on Windows, and like 20 potential on Macs, and that's equal? The day you'll trade me 100,000 dollars for a chance at 20 bucks is the day I'll toss my Apple in the trash.
Yes, but it also gives the perps more time to use the stolen stuff. I mean, if the fraud is at least reported to credit agencies, they can have a head's up. I mean, it's a lot better for the victim to stop this before money gets spent. And I'm sure the CC companies feel the same way.
I do use a Macintosh. In fact, I use one where I replaced the Finder with a commercial program. It's doable, much more so than in Windows. I could uninstall Safari if I wanted to, I've seen people who have done it without problems. My point is simply this: There is a folder at "System/Library/Core Services". A root or admin user can remove most of the stuff in there and replace it with a properly crafted program, and everything will be fine. Granted, that's tough because you're dealing with some interlocking with proprietary software, but in 8 months of use, I've seen two problems with replacing the Finder: there's a risk from updates, but I just put the original Finder back and then copy over it again. There's also a little more work to get the sudo feature when working with files. but that's also not a big deal. So look around before you fire from the hip.
You can't do most purely-internet things with Windows running Firefox either. A lot of the stuff on the Internet that doesn't work with Linux or Mac either installs a.exe (and thus isn't purely internet) or requires ActiveX (which is enough of a headache that I'd rather not have it on PCs either).
In software however, I've seen a lot of the reverse: Apple's stuff working better because it uses the "bazaar" model, as opposed to MS's "cathedral". Tiger consists of at least a dozen interconnected programs, each of which is removeable and replaceable (including Dashboard, the Finder, Spotlight, Safari, the Dock, etc.) Whereas Windows is all sort of jumbled together and is less seperable or partially replaceable than OS X.
Don't forget to add RIAA, MPAA, and Sony to the trusted list. If we have only one anto-spyware/virus/malware company, then they will make the definitions of what is and isn't malware. So if Sony does another rootkit, but buys MS (or any monopolist in the anti-malware trade) off, then no one will be able to call it dangerous.
What I meant was that a PS 3 is gonna be exactly the same in 5 or 6 years (and neither MS or Sony intend to make a new console sooner). I could upgrade my computer 3 years from now (well, first I need a gaming rig). So if $5000 PCs beat the PS 3 now, a $1500 PC will beat a PS 3 pretty soon.
The Core 2 Extreme is the Conroe Extreme Edition we previously saw truncing a FX-60 overclocked pretty high. I mean, it's not out yet, but there's enough demonstrations and information to say that it's gonna exist, probably in about 6-8 weeks. This isn't vaporware, it's very-very-dense-fog-ware.
To be fair, PS3's do cost a lot more than they sell for. They are a loss leader. I'm not saying you should buy that $900 number, but they are sold for at least some loss. And don't forget that computers can do more things and are upgradeable. but I 100% agree with you that console gaming is cheaper, and that this is an unfair comparison.
Slashdot Mirror
The Intel GMA 950s have nothing to do with it. Apple has to include something sweet standard in the Mac Pro. Like a 7800 GT. A 1 GB RAM, 4 core 2.0 GHz 7800 GT computer for $2000 will scream "serious" to gamers. Similarly, the iMac could use a better card, like a X1600 XT (or an X1800 if the MP goes higher) instead of the smaller X1600 model. No one is gonna buy a Macbook or a Mini for gaming. period.
Nah, this stuff is getting pretty common. Look at stuff like hansofoundation.org lots of advertising is being done with strange internet based stuff. Remember MS's Origami stuff? So Google isn't alone in that.
>>Yes, but it's one game. Do you really expect the whole XP-using world to upgrade to Vista because of Halo 2?
No, but every MS-owned game will suddenly now require DX10 I bet. And they make a good number of games (more than I once thought) in a wide variety of genres. All it takes is one or two "must-play" games to get someone to upgrade to Vista.
From now until whenever Vista launches in H1 2007, we're going to see a lot of it everywhere. Like it or not, Windows is by far the dominant OS, and any rev obviously makes the news. Microsoft wants to try to be in the headlines as much as possible, so they're astroturfing like mad, trying to up positive discussion about Vista. This'll only get worse the next 6 months or so. The simple fact is that it's gonna be the same old stuff, because we knew all of Vista's tricks and twists a year or two ago. Some of them have been shelved or pushed back, but the point is that all of these "reviews" and articles are gonna look similar because there's been no new feature of Vista or rumor of a new feature for a while, and we're not expecting any. Any article about Vista is going to be someone's opinion of it and it's new "features". Start ignoring them, or counter-astroturfing.
Well, if my friends who know nothing about PCs are buying a comptuer, they'll look to their tech-inclined friends. I'll say get a Mac, but when they decide to go PC, I might say, get this line over that line, these Intel chips are better. Tech people have an influence in their non-tech friends/relatives purchases
It's a book review. Obviously it's talking about a specific book. And an interesting one at that. And encouraging OSS games. So don't fret about it. If you think book reviews are slashvertisements, then don't look at any of them.
Wait, you can get wireless by default? I've tried, and neither 5.10 or 6.06 Flight5 boot CDs worked with my iBook's card.
I bet more people die due to accidental drowning while eating cereal. Or riding bikes. Or jumping rope.
Accidental drowning due to jumping rope? That's a leading cause of death, right behind heart disease, Chuck Norris, cancer, and Jack Bauer. Or have you gone looking up "facts" in a "book" again? Next time, ask your gut, not some dead tree.
Right now, content sites balance the price of bandwidth with the sale of ad space. They have to average more income from ad clicks than it costs them bandwidth. If they get hit with "Tiered Internet" costs, their costs go up, which means they either:
A) Put more ads on the site
B)Start charging money for formerly free services (like the stuff in GoogleLabs, or blogs costing money to rent), or
C) Go out of business.
Whichever way it works out, the customer loses value or has to pay more. Therefore, this plan is bad for consumers.
Does it matter if they only get one exec? If they committed a crime to get the evidence, it is inadmissable. Then they have virtually no evidence, and a very shaky legal theory to go on (hosting torrents != hosting copyrighted files)
Very true. But whenever technology gets involved in a discussion, people's eyes sort of glaze over. No one knows what's going on, they just hear Internet phone calls, terrorism, and encryption. While you and I know that anyone intercepting a packet (encrypted or not) can tell where it came from and where it's going, America doesn't. They probably think it's an effort at parity between VOIP and normal phone calls (if they know what VOIP is).
"Your computer thinks you were trying to do something stupid. Your computer also thinks you never actually read these dialog boxes. Press "yes" if you agree, and you will be shown something that will make sure you NEVER blindly click "yes" again"
If goatse is involved, I trust that some users will, in fact, be doing their clicking blindly for the rest of their lives.
If the user buys a new PC Microsoft makes another OEM Vista license sale. Win - Win... well except the consumer that is.
MS makes more off of a retail sale. $200ish vs. $80-100. MS wants upgrades to be software-only (esp. since you'll have to get a new machine a few years later anyways.
My University simply calls it a campus-wide LAN which happens to connect to the Internet. They make no claims at being an ISP. That gives them more power, I think, and it'd let them out of this law.
If we could reduce spam, we'd hopefully reduce the "need" (or desire) for zombie computers, and thus decrease the number of trojans/viruses/worms. Zombies are useful for spam and DDOS, and cutting the spammers out of the picture cuts the number of new viruses trying to make botnets.
End users have been downloading large content for years now
No. Some geeky users have been using the Net for large transfers. Most people might be managing music sharing, but if IPTV or VOIP is going to be coming for the general public, then there could be an issue.
Filesharing is mostly illegal, and the stuff that isn't illegal (Linux) is for people who already can figure out how to do it. this results in a lack of documentation about filesharing and 1-2-3 guides to how to set it up (or a Geek Squad-esque group to do it), which means the general public that didn't go for filesharing will go for a legal streaming video system if there's an easy way to do it (for people who have issues with email)
So 100,000 birds in the hand are worth 20 in the bush?
I mean, note the word "potential". There are thousands of vulnerabilities that have been exploited on Windows, and like 20 potential on Macs, and that's equal? The day you'll trade me 100,000 dollars for a chance at 20 bucks is the day I'll toss my Apple in the trash.
Yes, but it also gives the perps more time to use the stolen stuff. I mean, if the fraud is at least reported to credit agencies, they can have a head's up. I mean, it's a lot better for the victim to stop this before money gets spent. And I'm sure the CC companies feel the same way.
I do use a Macintosh. In fact, I use one where I replaced the Finder with a commercial program. It's doable, much more so than in Windows. I could uninstall Safari if I wanted to, I've seen people who have done it without problems. My point is simply this: There is a folder at "System/Library/Core Services". A root or admin user can remove most of the stuff in there and replace it with a properly crafted program, and everything will be fine. Granted, that's tough because you're dealing with some interlocking with proprietary software, but in 8 months of use, I've seen two problems with replacing the Finder: there's a risk from updates, but I just put the original Finder back and then copy over it again. There's also a little more work to get the sudo feature when working with files. but that's also not a big deal. So look around before you fire from the hip.
You can't do most purely-internet things with Windows running Firefox either. A lot of the stuff on the Internet that doesn't work with Linux or Mac either installs a .exe (and thus isn't purely internet) or requires ActiveX (which is enough of a headache that I'd rather not have it on PCs either).
In software however, I've seen a lot of the reverse: Apple's stuff working better because it uses the "bazaar" model, as opposed to MS's "cathedral". Tiger consists of at least a dozen interconnected programs, each of which is removeable and replaceable (including Dashboard, the Finder, Spotlight, Safari, the Dock, etc.) Whereas Windows is all sort of jumbled together and is less seperable or partially replaceable than OS X.
Don't forget to add RIAA, MPAA, and Sony to the trusted list. If we have only one anto-spyware/virus/malware company, then they will make the definitions of what is and isn't malware. So if Sony does another rootkit, but buys MS (or any monopolist in the anti-malware trade) off, then no one will be able to call it dangerous.
What I meant was that a PS 3 is gonna be exactly the same in 5 or 6 years (and neither MS or Sony intend to make a new console sooner). I could upgrade my computer 3 years from now (well, first I need a gaming rig). So if $5000 PCs beat the PS 3 now, a $1500 PC will beat a PS 3 pretty soon.
The Core 2 Extreme is the Conroe Extreme Edition we previously saw truncing a FX-60 overclocked pretty high. I mean, it's not out yet, but there's enough demonstrations and information to say that it's gonna exist, probably in about 6-8 weeks. This isn't vaporware, it's very-very-dense-fog-ware.
To be fair, PS3's do cost a lot more than they sell for. They are a loss leader. I'm not saying you should buy that $900 number, but they are sold for at least some loss. And don't forget that computers can do more things and are upgradeable. but I 100% agree with you that console gaming is cheaper, and that this is an unfair comparison.