I must say that these recent advances in chip performance vs battery life have definitely made laptops more viable. There's still plenty to be desired of course certainly we are ages away from seeing a laptop that can seriously handle a video card and chip set worth playing up to date games on. Over all for business users I believe the laptop is truly coming of age. 7+ hour charge times on normal use is nothing to sneeze at and it's what I typically see on mine.
Fair enough, I suppose that's why the first part of my comment was a fact and the second an opinion you are free to disagree with. I think that I am trying to say that plenty of good content can be missed simply because there is not enough people out there drumming up attention for it.
In reality, interestingly, Google's top customers are those whom produce it revenue, I imagine those people are the ones fueling add campaigns with big budgets being funneled into Google's ad solutions. I am sorry to remind you that while we all love Google's policy, the truth remains, they have a responsibility to their share holders which cannot be ignored.
My original point however remains, it is a socially driven system which favors those with more popular voices and/or those with more money in the bank. Is that democratic?
Does that mean the outcome is always utilitarian? After all, Google's utility is a prime reason for it's success today.
One key problem with the indexing and page rank scheme is that Google is Flash blind. I have spent a great deal of time trying to deal with the problem of Google getting to flash driven sites and found that the only way is to create content that allows Google to index a higher percentage of the site. In many cases I had to do this as a function of a php script running nightly to capture content and create an 'index' of my own just so Google could keep up. Is this then a violation (if I understand the article correctly)?
Personally, I believe how you are Google ranked seems unfair since it's based on what other individuals and organizations are thought of and therefore think of you. Let's face it, it's a socially popular methodology and those who are in, well they will remain in, and those who are not have a more difficult time getting into the main stream. Of course you could skip all that by jumping on Google add scheme couldn't you? What we have here is a digital disparity, in my opinion.
A prime example of the power of traffic this site was created out of string and bubble gum and its worth 600 Million dollars.... Where's all this consumer data getting sold to?
You think News Corp. is making that $$ back on adds alone?
Any one care to let me in on the secret?? Who buys the data? What name is it resold under?
speed............. I was simply trying to put it in less technical terms since there seems to be some confusion as to what the two really mean
Laughable. You can only push latencies so low (the whole speed of light thing, remember?) but you can make bandwidth arbitrarily large. So they cannot go "hand in hand" forever.
Well and true however you still have hops and backplanes to deal with and while it may not be a big deal to you, remember why you bother to pay attention to FSB's and ram speeds again. IMO (not worth that much really) we are on the verge of a more complex transactional baised internet where the speed in which instructions can pass around the world will begin to make much more of a differance.
Don't blow your load yet.
Thanks for the advice. AJAX does represent a step toward a future where again the transactions become more important than the volume of information.
Honestly I was just trying to get a Score:5 for funny... But it appears You are infact cooler than me....:-(
SPEED - BANDWIDTH:: Get your geek dictionary out....
Speed: how fast you can go on your favorate interstate.
Bandwidth: More like how many cars can fit through an interstate at a time.
Speed, the amount of time it takes to pass a request and get a response. Bandwidth how much response you can fit through at a time. In the short term with VOIP.... SPEED will be come more of an issue (latency) and BANDWIDTH less of one. However thier advances MUST go hand and hand if we are going to see truely apliance type computers (just running web browsers) and the the continuation of the current AJAX and comprehensive webapplications initiatives (IE GOOGLE and SUN's OFFICE suite)
I tend to agree here. I believe Redhat offers the same set of problems granted you get 10 full years of support before your distro goes out of date but upgrading to the next major release is anything but easy. Consider all the.conf changes you may have in place or if you are like me all the cron jobs that point all over the server. Just migrating these customizations alone can be fun.
At home I use ubuntu (a debian fork) and so far I was able to do a major upgrade with out serious damage. It seems systems that can just do what is expected of them when it's time to upgrade and include ample documentation about the differences are the only way to really make it work.
Why is windows eaasier? I believe it has to do with standardized installations and retention of customization in services. Meaning I can just install a copy of Windows server and run an MSI and poof no compiling, no complex configuration. I hate to say it but when it comes to spoon feeding you MS seems to have most other companies beat which in and of it self is I believe the root of the problem. People don't seem to want to learn, they seem to be more interested in being told what to do.
Back to the linux side, clearly the systems are more stable lets see uptime admits I have 1.5 years and counting on the linux server I'm logged into now. And why do we tend to use linux? Because it allows us an extraordinary amount of flexibility which seems to come at a cost (at least for the moment) ease of maneuverability.
The reality of PPV is that its a product based buisness and not a service based one.
Look at Netflix, one of the fastest growing entertainment companies with an ingenious model. They are doing so much buisness that they no longer have to pay indivdual media licensing fees. They instead can pay ussage fees on thier movies, consider the next logical move. Video on demand through highspeed connections at a monthly service rate. You get a quantified number of movies to watch a month and all at 1 monthly rate and not some insane 3 dollars a movie, as of now I rent 9-12 movies a month for my standard 20 bucks through the mail. If they offered ondemand service I would double my ussage and be willing to pay 40. PPV and other product based consumebles are phasing out and service oriented ones are moving in.
Want another example? Windows -- Redhat... Would you rather license windows or subscribe to RH?
Napster - Buying Cd's... Not that Napsters taking off these days but the concept is there.
Slashdot Mirror
Just think.
Upload your app, pay 1$ a CPU hour, charge to a credit card with a stolen identity...
Boom! -- Enter the biggest mail bomb credit card theft combo in history...
I must say that these recent advances in chip performance vs battery life have definitely made laptops more viable. There's still plenty to be desired of course certainly we are ages away from seeing a laptop that can seriously handle a video card and chip set worth playing up to date games on. Over all for business users I believe the laptop is truly coming of age. 7+ hour charge times on normal use is nothing to sneeze at and it's what I typically see on mine.
Wow... Talk about being flamed.
Fair enough, I suppose that's why the first part of my comment was a fact and the second an opinion you are free to disagree with. I think that I am trying to say that plenty of good content can be missed simply because there is not enough people out there drumming up attention for it.
In reality, interestingly, Google's top customers are those whom produce it revenue, I imagine those people are the ones fueling add campaigns with big budgets being funneled into Google's ad solutions. I am sorry to remind you that while we all love Google's policy, the truth remains, they have a responsibility to their share holders which cannot be ignored.
My original point however remains, it is a socially driven system which favors those with more popular voices and/or those with more money in the bank. Is that democratic?
Does that mean the outcome is always utilitarian? After all, Google's utility is a prime reason for it's success today.
One key problem with the indexing and page rank scheme is that Google is Flash blind. I have spent a great deal of time trying to deal with the problem of Google getting to flash driven sites and found that the only way is to create content that allows Google to index a higher percentage of the site. In many cases I had to do this as a function of a php script running nightly to capture content and create an 'index' of my own just so Google could keep up. Is this then a violation (if I understand the article correctly)?
Personally, I believe how you are Google ranked seems unfair since it's based on what other individuals and organizations are thought of and therefore think of you. Let's face it, it's a socially popular methodology and those who are in, well they will remain in, and those who are not have a more difficult time getting into the main stream. Of course you could skip all that by jumping on Google add scheme couldn't you? What we have here is a digital disparity, in my opinion.
A prime example of the power of traffic this site was created out of string and bubble gum and its worth 600 Million dollars.... Where's all this consumer data getting sold to?
You think News Corp. is making that $$ back on adds alone?
Any one care to let me in on the secret??
Who buys the data? What name is it resold under?
speed............. I was simply trying to put it in less technical terms since there seems to be some confusion as to what the two really mean
:-(
Laughable. You can only push latencies so low (the whole speed of light thing, remember?) but you can make bandwidth arbitrarily large. So they cannot go "hand in hand" forever.
Well and true however you still have hops and backplanes to deal with and while it may not be a big deal to you, remember why you bother to pay attention to FSB's and ram speeds again. IMO (not worth that much really) we are on the verge of a more complex transactional baised internet where the speed in which instructions can pass around the world will begin to make much more of a differance.
Don't blow your load yet.
Thanks for the advice. AJAX does represent a step toward a future where again the transactions become more important than the volume of information.
Honestly I was just trying to get a Score:5 for funny... But it appears You are infact cooler than me....
BTW: I CAN'T SPELL... Take your pot shots at my spelling if you like..
SPEED - BANDWIDTH :: Get your geek dictionary out....
.... SPEED will be come more of an issue (latency) and BANDWIDTH less of one. However thier advances MUST go hand and hand if we are going to see truely apliance type computers (just running web browsers) and the the continuation of the current AJAX and comprehensive webapplications initiatives (IE GOOGLE and SUN's OFFICE suite)
Speed: how fast you can go on your favorate interstate.
Bandwidth: More like how many cars can fit through an interstate at a time.
Speed, the amount of time it takes to pass a request and get a response. Bandwidth how much response you can fit through at a time. In the short term with VOIP
I tend to agree here. I believe Redhat offers the same set of problems granted you get 10 full years of support before your distro goes out of date but upgrading to the next major release is anything but easy. Consider all the .conf changes you may have in place or if you are like me all the cron jobs that point all over the server. Just migrating these customizations alone can be fun.
At home I use ubuntu (a debian fork) and so far I was able to do a major upgrade with out serious damage. It seems systems that can just do what is expected of them when it's time to upgrade and include ample documentation about the differences are the only way to really make it work.
Why is windows eaasier? I believe it has to do with standardized installations and retention of customization in services. Meaning I can just install a copy of Windows server and run an MSI and poof no compiling, no complex configuration. I hate to say it but when it comes to spoon feeding you MS seems to have most other companies beat which in and of it self is I believe the root of the problem. People don't seem to want to learn, they seem to be more interested in being told what to do.
Back to the linux side, clearly the systems are more stable lets see uptime admits I have 1.5 years and counting on the linux server I'm logged into now. And why do we tend to use linux? Because it allows us an extraordinary amount of flexibility which seems to come at a cost (at least for the moment) ease of maneuverability.
The reality of PPV is that its a product based buisness and not a service based one.
... Would you rather license windows or subscribe to RH?
... Not that Napsters taking off these days but the concept is there.
Look at Netflix, one of the fastest growing entertainment companies with an ingenious model. They are doing so much buisness that they no longer have to pay indivdual media licensing fees. They instead can pay ussage fees on thier movies, consider the next logical move. Video on demand through highspeed connections at a monthly service rate. You get a quantified number of movies to watch a month and all at 1 monthly rate and not some insane 3 dollars a movie, as of now I rent 9-12 movies a month for my standard 20 bucks through the mail. If they offered ondemand service I would double my ussage and be willing to pay 40. PPV and other product based consumebles are phasing out and service oriented ones are moving in.
Want another example?
Windows -- Redhat
Napster - Buying Cd's
Im sure you can think of hundreds more.
Siefkencp