That was only true in the mythbusters case because they were peeing on something that was at ground level. Think about a urinal instead of a rail laying on the ground - it is alot closer to where the stream starts, so there is more chance of getting a continous stream contacting the surface before it breaks up.
Peeing on an electric rail is no problem - but an electric wall? I think that would do it.
At 15 percent oxygen, it's safe for humans to enter. The lower oxygen content of the air is similar to being at an altitude of about 6,000 feet, Eickhorn said. He demonstrated with a lighter inside a sealed atrium Wagner has on display at Cebit. It won't light.
6,000 feet? People regularly burn wood above 6,000 feet don't they? Basically, someone in a mountain state with a wood stove, or camping. People in the Andes are probably burning wood even higher than that.
Does someone know how this is supposed to work? Am I missing something?
It will be a hybrid iPod/cell phone/PDA with no sacrifices in functionality, compared to carrying around three separate devices. As Jobs mentioned in his keynote, the price is still cheaper than buying a smartphone and iPod Nano separately. Yeah, but I can write/download/install any software I want on the smart phone (which, incidentally, is why Apple/Cingular's excuse for not allowing that on the iphone is so silly - you can already do it today and it hasn't brought down the cell networks!)
Personally, I think TPS is just as good with keyboard/mouse as FPS.
I would put forth Max Payne (1&2), Splinter Cell (not sure how many there are now, I played a couple), Jedi Outcast, and Jedi Academy as examples of this. I played all those in third-person mode (though some had first-person options) and the mouse was definetly still my weapon of choice.
I think, for a lot of people, the whole point of playing FPS/TPS games on the PC is NOT having to use the controller and being able to use keyboard/mouse.
It doesn't matter though - if you are right, then we certainly don't want them to be "committing their passion to real life problems" now do we? No harm done then if they commit them to these other things the OP is deriding.
Also, lets make sure to keep them away from anything complicated that their "simplistic" minds could screw up - like anything involving technology and engineering. I definitely want to lead the governance/problem solving/decision-making of my country to our wonderful Ted "The Tubes!" Stevens. He is truly the one with a powerful enough intellect to make short work of these complicated problems that engineers are not equipped for under any circumstances.
1) Feel like they have some control over that environment 2) Understand its rules, and how to get things done 3) Can quickly implement the solutions they have found, on their own or with a small group that they have some influence with
None of these things exist/are true in "real life". The worlds problems are not as easily solved as a raid-boss and even if they were (some problems are simple) they are impossible to implement because it requires getting through some sort of bureaucracy/other people/entrenched interests to get accomplished. Your friends could spend their whole lives working on "it" (whatever it is) and accomplish nothing. They can spend a few days/weeks and accomplish their task in WoW (or a software project, or anything else they enjoy).
How many geeks have gone through the phase of becoming very interested in a particular social/government problem, studied up on it and learned all they could, then come up with a solution. (This is the sort of things engineers/geeks will do - and the way they will approach problems) Then when they get done, they realize there is no way they can implement their solution because:
1) The issue is too steeped in politics/corruption/ignorance/bullshit 2) There is no way, as a single person, they can hope to affect any change - even with the best idea in the world
They then realize the futility of it all and go back to solving problems/accomplishing goals that they can actually do something about themselves.
Was this play against an AI opponent or a real person? What size map?
1) The AI in the game sucks (mod teams will probably fix this)
2) Gameplay changes drastically depending on map size
I'm in the SupCom beta, and against real opponents on a smaller (10k-20k) map you get constant fighting and action it sounds like you want. That said, it is supposed to scale up to be a more high-level/strategic deal with the larger maps.
I have downloaded some really fun-to-watch replays from beta matches that have action in the first minutes and are non-stop from there:)
My quote from a reply to another guy clarifies my position - the bolded part especially addresses your point:
I wouldn't say all other areas - just the ones you personally use. You can read my reply to the original poster a bit farther up to get where I was going, but it boils down to this: He was saying all the windows users were missing out on using all these OS features for the past 2 years.
I am saying that is irrelevant because that isn't why people use the computer. As long as there is even one piece/class of software (or hardware for that matter) that the user deems neccesary that they wouldn't have been able to use for all that time, the feature disparity between the two OSs doesn't matter. Sure, they would have those couple OS niceties, but they wouldn't be able to do what they wanted the computer to do in the first place. People don't use the computer for the OS, they use it for the apps.
If these users had "seen the light" as the poster implies, they would have spent the last 2 years without being able to do all the things they wanted with the computer. Ooo, but they could have so much fun playing with searchlight.
The only time you could make an argument about OS features being so important would be if all other things were equal. The OS niceties don't hold a candle to grandma being able to use her geneology software, or her scanner. There are a whole slew of users that one might assume only use a browser or word, but many have those couple of things they want to do that are specialized. As I said a couple posts up, I know alot of tech-novices that have those one or two "hooks". It may not be a majority of things they use, but it is more important to them than improved search.
One line summary:
He implies they were missing out by not using other OSs, I am saying they would have been missing out if they had.
Saying "The vast majority of uses" doesn't make a difference. If there is even one thing they deem important, then no OS feature around is going to be more important than that actual "task". The OS differences just aren't important enough. I wish all things were equal and things like that could come to the forefront (it would burn a candle under MSs ass like FF has done) but that just isn't the case.
I can't think of every single piece of random software that regular people have found and use, all I can say is I am surprised everytime I sit down in front of someone's and find something I have never heard of. But sure as day, they have found it and use it for their particular hobby/interest. I ask them what they want to backup (I use to do home support in HS) and they look at their desktop and think, then say "oh, well my such and such program - I have all my widgets saved in there!". What makes it all the worse is the people making it are usually also part of that hobby/interest, so they just make it for that group, and don't have time/interest in things like interopability. I hate to invoke buzzwords, but the long tail could be invoked here. Each has a small part, but added up (and, again, as long as each person has even one or a few) it adds up.
I mentioned hardware in my quote there, and you mentioned it as well. Knowing which one are compatible and going for those things doesn't do any good for the people that already have them. Which should be more important? The OS features, or that huge chunk of change they have invested in various equipment? I think most people think the latter. Once again, if they had "switched" they would have been SOL for those two years, or would have to buy more equipment. I claim that is more important to them than whatever OS differences there are - and as such they aren't (or haven't been) "missing out" as you imply - they have been doing things they want with their computer instead.
You guys are all preaching to the choir, I wish I could recommend this or that to people as an alternative - and tell them "yup you can do all your stuff on this nicer OS - no problem!" but I know that
Having used both, I don't think they are night and day. I guess that is an opinion though.
If all your programs work on both - more power to you. I'm just saying my experience and interaction with people has been otherwise, and as long as there is even one thing they want to that they can't, then they are not "missing out for the last 2 years" as the original post implies - in fact the situation would be opposite.
To clarify - I'm not trying to be antagonistic to other OSs. As I mentioned in the other reply I use AIX (unix) every day, I administed linux in college, and enoy the extra features of OSX. Each is great for the things they do, and it sucks they can't be judged purely on their functional merits - but that is just the way it is.
Saying all the people were missing out by using windows just isn't the case in the grand scheme of things. I wish it was! I want to have my cake and eat it to as much as the next computer geek, and I want there to be more competition. It stimulates action by all involved, as we have seen with firefox. If OSX or Linux was nipping at Microsoft's heels, they would probably make a better OS.
I wouldn't say all other areas - just the ones you personally use. You can read my reply to the original poster a bit farther up to get where I was going, but it boils down to this: He was saying all the windows users were missing out on using all these OS features for the past 2 years.
I am saying that is irrelevant because that isn't why people use the computer. As long as there is even one piece/class of software (or hardware for that matter) that the user deems neccesary that they wouldn't have been able to use for all that time, the feature disparity between the two OSs doesn't matter. Sure, they would have those couple OS niceties, but they wouldn't be able to do what they wanted the computer to do in the first place. People don't use the computer for the OS, they use it for the apps.
If these users had "seen the light" as the poster implies, they would have spent the last 2 years without being able to do all the things they wanted with the computer. Ooo, but they could have so much fun playing with searchlight.
The only time you could make an argument about OS features being so important would be if all other things were equal. The OS niceties don't hold a candle to grandma being able to use her geneology software, or her scanner. There are a whole slew of users that one might assume only use a browser or word, but many have those couple of things they want to do that are specialized. As I said a couple posts up, I know alot of tech-novices that have those one or two "hooks". It may not be a majority of things they use, but it is more important to them than improved search.
One line summary:
He implies they were missing out by not using other OSs, I am saying they would have been missing out if they had.
You proved my point. There was software they could run on windows that they couldn't run on alternatives that so important to them that it out-weighed other factors - like the aforementioned OS features.
Your friends were gamers, so that was their "hook". Other people have other software predilictions that can't be filled by alternatives, so they still use windows. In all those cases, the software they can run was more important to them than OS features.
That is a nice list, but I had already guessed that the only software you personally used would be those available on the mac. But that is just you.
Also, calling those various "other" markets "niche" doesn't make the needs of the millions of people that are in them go away. There are tons of special purpose apps that even tech-novices I know use and would not want to do without. All the things on your list are fairly mainstream.
My point simply was that the features the OS itself provides are not nearly as important as the software it can run. I like alot of the things vista/osx can do in terms of navigation, searching, etc. but they don't come anywhere close to being as important as being able to run the software I want.
I work with unix every day at work for server tasks, I love OSX and Final Cut for video editing, but my main home OS is still windows for everything else. I like all of the alternative OSs for various reasons, but I don't think people have somehow been missing the boat or living in the dark ages because they haven't used them.
I'm hoping someday you can be welcomed to the world of the-rest-of-us, with all the software that I have had available on Windows since 2005 or so.:P
You know, the stuff you use to actually do things on this computer device.
This has already happened, really. Back in the day the boxes for PC games were huge, but now they are pretty small - about the size of a DVD case but maybe twice as thick.
This is untrue of AvP. That was based on a comic book that itself was based on two franchises that are considered fairly good. In any case, the comic book was good, but he didn't stay true to the source AT ALL (not even the right time period) and it completely sucked. He pulled a Uwe Boll on it.
He is up there with Uwe. Not quite as bad, but almost.
The key thing to remember is it came long before IE7. In fact, considering IE7 isn't actually out, this is still the case.
It brought tabbed browsing and all the other modern browser features to the IE engine. This is a big win if you are forced to use IE renderin for various things (as./ers will be well aware of).
Once you get it configured the way you like it, its nice to use.
Slashdot Mirror
I agree with you - and will just add Republicans != conservative ;)
I'd like a real conservative and real liberal party, so people have distinct things to choose from.
That was only true in the mythbusters case because they were peeing on something that was at ground level. Think about a urinal instead of a rail laying on the ground - it is alot closer to where the stream starts, so there is more chance of getting a continous stream contacting the surface before it breaks up.
Peeing on an electric rail is no problem - but an electric wall? I think that would do it.
From TFA:
At 15 percent oxygen, it's safe for humans to enter. The lower oxygen content of the air is similar to being at an altitude of about 6,000 feet, Eickhorn said. He demonstrated with a lighter inside a sealed atrium Wagner has on display at Cebit. It won't light.
6,000 feet? People regularly burn wood above 6,000 feet don't they? Basically, someone in a mountain state with a wood stove, or camping. People in the Andes are probably burning wood even higher than that.
Does someone know how this is supposed to work? Am I missing something?
I'm puzzled as to why it's not more popular. I heard you can attack Giant Enemy Crabs at their weak point for MASSIVE DAMAGE.
Also, it has real-time weapon switching! Take that Wii Remote!
X-COM 2 Ftw!
I would mod you up :)
Did you notice I stated "FPS/TPS"? TPS = Third Person Shooter
Personally, I think TPS is just as good with keyboard/mouse as FPS.
I would put forth Max Payne (1&2), Splinter Cell (not sure how many there are now, I played a couple), Jedi Outcast, and Jedi Academy as examples of this. I played all those in third-person mode (though some had first-person options) and the mouse was definetly still my weapon of choice.
I think, for a lot of people, the whole point of playing FPS/TPS games on the PC is NOT having to use the controller and being able to use keyboard/mouse.
"Gitmo makes the Japanese internment camps of WWII look like quilting bees."
I LOL'd. Wow. Just wow. FUD has never been that thick.
A generalization, but perhaps.
It doesn't matter though - if you are right, then we certainly don't want them to be "committing their passion to real life problems" now do we? No harm done then if they commit them to these other things the OP is deriding.
Also, lets make sure to keep them away from anything complicated that their "simplistic" minds could screw up - like anything involving technology and engineering. I definitely want to lead the governance/problem solving/decision-making of my country to our wonderful Ted "The Tubes!" Stevens. He is truly the one with a powerful enough intellect to make short work of these complicated problems that engineers are not equipped for under any circumstances.
What you describe makes perfect sense to me.
Your friends:
1) Feel like they have some control over that environment
2) Understand its rules, and how to get things done
3) Can quickly implement the solutions they have found, on their own or with a small group that they have some influence with
None of these things exist/are true in "real life". The worlds problems are not as easily solved as a raid-boss and even if they were (some problems are simple) they are impossible to implement because it requires getting through some sort of bureaucracy/other people/entrenched interests to get accomplished. Your friends could spend their whole lives working on "it" (whatever it is) and accomplish nothing. They can spend a few days/weeks and accomplish their task in WoW (or a software project, or anything else they enjoy).
How many geeks have gone through the phase of becoming very interested in a particular social/government problem, studied up on it and learned all they could, then come up with a solution. (This is the sort of things engineers/geeks will do - and the way they will approach problems) Then when they get done, they realize there is no way they can implement their solution because:
1) The issue is too steeped in politics/corruption/ignorance/bullshit
2) There is no way, as a single person, they can hope to affect any change - even with the best idea in the world
They then realize the futility of it all and go back to solving problems/accomplishing goals that they can actually do something about themselves.
Was this play against an AI opponent or a real person? What size map? 1) The AI in the game sucks (mod teams will probably fix this) 2) Gameplay changes drastically depending on map size I'm in the SupCom beta, and against real opponents on a smaller (10k-20k) map you get constant fighting and action it sounds like you want. That said, it is supposed to scale up to be a more high-level/strategic deal with the larger maps. I have downloaded some really fun-to-watch replays from beta matches that have action in the first minutes and are non-stop from there :)
I wouldn't say all other areas - just the ones you personally use. You can read my reply to the original poster a bit farther up to get where I was going, but it boils down to this:
He was saying all the windows users were missing out on using all these OS features for the past 2 years.
I am saying that is irrelevant because that isn't why people use the computer. As long as there is even one piece/class of software (or hardware for that matter) that the user deems neccesary that they wouldn't have been able to use for all that time, the feature disparity between the two OSs doesn't matter. Sure, they would have those couple OS niceties, but they wouldn't be able to do what they wanted the computer to do in the first place. People don't use the computer for the OS, they use it for the apps.
If these users had "seen the light" as the poster implies, they would have spent the last 2 years without being able to do all the things they wanted with the computer. Ooo, but they could have so much fun playing with searchlight.
The only time you could make an argument about OS features being so important would be if all other things were equal. The OS niceties don't hold a candle to grandma being able to use her geneology software, or her scanner. There are a whole slew of users that one might assume only use a browser or word, but many have those couple of things they want to do that are specialized. As I said a couple posts up, I know alot of tech-novices that have those one or two "hooks". It may not be a majority of things they use, but it is more important to them than improved search.
One line summary:
He implies they were missing out by not using other OSs, I am saying they would have been missing out if they had.
Saying "The vast majority of uses" doesn't make a difference. If there is even one thing they deem important, then no OS feature around is going to be more important than that actual "task". The OS differences just aren't important enough. I wish all things were equal and things like that could come to the forefront (it would burn a candle under MSs ass like FF has done) but that just isn't the case.
I can't think of every single piece of random software that regular people have found and use, all I can say is I am surprised everytime I sit down in front of someone's and find something I have never heard of. But sure as day, they have found it and use it for their particular hobby/interest. I ask them what they want to backup (I use to do home support in HS) and they look at their desktop and think, then say "oh, well my such and such program - I have all my widgets saved in there!". What makes it all the worse is the people making it are usually also part of that hobby/interest, so they just make it for that group, and don't have time/interest in things like interopability. I hate to invoke buzzwords, but the long tail could be invoked here. Each has a small part, but added up (and, again, as long as each person has even one or a few) it adds up.
I mentioned hardware in my quote there, and you mentioned it as well. Knowing which one are compatible and going for those things doesn't do any good for the people that already have them. Which should be more important? The OS features, or that huge chunk of change they have invested in various equipment? I think most people think the latter. Once again, if they had "switched" they would have been SOL for those two years, or would have to buy more equipment. I claim that is more important to them than whatever OS differences there are - and as such they aren't (or haven't been) "missing out" as you imply - they have been doing things they want with their computer instead.
You guys are all preaching to the choir, I wish I could recommend this or that to people as an alternative - and tell them "yup you can do all your stuff on this nicer OS - no problem!" but I know that
Having used both, I don't think they are night and day. I guess that is an opinion though. If all your programs work on both - more power to you. I'm just saying my experience and interaction with people has been otherwise, and as long as there is even one thing they want to that they can't, then they are not "missing out for the last 2 years" as the original post implies - in fact the situation would be opposite.
To clarify - I'm not trying to be antagonistic to other OSs. As I mentioned in the other reply I use AIX (unix) every day, I administed linux in college, and enoy the extra features of OSX. Each is great for the things they do, and it sucks they can't be judged purely on their functional merits - but that is just the way it is.
Saying all the people were missing out by using windows just isn't the case in the grand scheme of things. I wish it was! I want to have my cake and eat it to as much as the next computer geek, and I want there to be more competition. It stimulates action by all involved, as we have seen with firefox. If OSX or Linux was nipping at Microsoft's heels, they would probably make a better OS.
I wouldn't say all other areas - just the ones you personally use. You can read my reply to the original poster a bit farther up to get where I was going, but it boils down to this:
He was saying all the windows users were missing out on using all these OS features for the past 2 years.
I am saying that is irrelevant because that isn't why people use the computer. As long as there is even one piece/class of software (or hardware for that matter) that the user deems neccesary that they wouldn't have been able to use for all that time, the feature disparity between the two OSs doesn't matter. Sure, they would have those couple OS niceties, but they wouldn't be able to do what they wanted the computer to do in the first place. People don't use the computer for the OS, they use it for the apps.
If these users had "seen the light" as the poster implies, they would have spent the last 2 years without being able to do all the things they wanted with the computer. Ooo, but they could have so much fun playing with searchlight.
The only time you could make an argument about OS features being so important would be if all other things were equal. The OS niceties don't hold a candle to grandma being able to use her geneology software, or her scanner. There are a whole slew of users that one might assume only use a browser or word, but many have those couple of things they want to do that are specialized. As I said a couple posts up, I know alot of tech-novices that have those one or two "hooks". It may not be a majority of things they use, but it is more important to them than improved search.
One line summary:
He implies they were missing out by not using other OSs, I am saying they would have been missing out if they had.
You proved my point. There was software they could run on windows that they couldn't run on alternatives that so important to them that it out-weighed other factors - like the aforementioned OS features. Your friends were gamers, so that was their "hook". Other people have other software predilictions that can't be filled by alternatives, so they still use windows. In all those cases, the software they can run was more important to them than OS features.
That is a nice list, but I had already guessed that the only software you personally used would be those available on the mac. But that is just you.
Also, calling those various "other" markets "niche" doesn't make the needs of the millions of people that are in them go away. There are tons of special purpose apps that even tech-novices I know use and would not want to do without. All the things on your list are fairly mainstream.
My point simply was that the features the OS itself provides are not nearly as important as the software it can run. I like alot of the things vista/osx can do in terms of navigation, searching, etc. but they don't come anywhere close to being as important as being able to run the software I want.
I work with unix every day at work for server tasks, I love OSX and Final Cut for video editing, but my main home OS is still windows for everything else. I like all of the alternative OSs for various reasons, but I don't think people have somehow been missing the boat or living in the dark ages because they haven't used them.
I don't think the GP thinks its fair either - I believe that is what he was saying ;)
I'm hoping someday you can be welcomed to the world of the-rest-of-us, with all the software that I have had available on Windows since 2005 or so. :P
You know, the stuff you use to actually do things on this computer device.
This has already happened, really. Back in the day the boxes for PC games were huge, but now they are pretty small - about the size of a DVD case but maybe twice as thick.
This is untrue of AvP. That was based on a comic book that itself was based on two franchises that are considered fairly good. In any case, the comic book was good, but he didn't stay true to the source AT ALL (not even the right time period) and it completely sucked. He pulled a Uwe Boll on it. He is up there with Uwe. Not quite as bad, but almost.
The key thing to remember is it came long before IE7. In fact, considering IE7 isn't actually out, this is still the case.
./ers will be well aware of).
It brought tabbed browsing and all the other modern browser features to the IE engine. This is a big win if you are forced to use IE renderin for various things (as
Once you get it configured the way you like it, its nice to use.