Considering that the trend is toward making chips with smaller transistors that operate at less voltage and thus at lower temperatures, I don't think that having a few of these ozone-emitting devices around will create a pollution problem. In fact, ozone has quite a beneficial property in correct quantities, including cancer therapy, mold or smoke eradication, even water treatment (most high end swimming pools use ozone rather than very harmful chemicals such as chlorine).
AOL might have popped the bubble due to sheer volume of CD's distributed. I remember when it was cool just to have a CD-ROM drive, and even cooler to have one that was 2X or 4X. You would even pay a bit extra for the convenience of buying something on CD so you wouldn't have to flip floppies to install. And finally you could do cool things like hear audio or watch dinky video clips. But the bubble burst when all that became commonplace and the CD-ROM became just another necessary component, like the floppy drive was for many years.
My point is, eventually they are going to be forced to upgrade, either to Vista or the next gen MS OS, or Linux/OSX/etc. Either way it is going to go along with an application upgrade. I see Vista sales being driven more by application upgrades than anything else, because once the application base is upgraded, businesses will want to upgrade the OS to take advantage of the features that are available including increased security, features like ReadyBoost and ReadyDrive.
Ideally, they should have made the clean break with an all 64bit OS, thus killing two birds with one stone.
You see, the thing is NOT that Vista is broken but that other software breaks on Vista.
How much of this is due to lazy software development by 3rd party vendors in the past 12 years since Windows 95 came on the scene? Many of the incompatibilities are due to hard coded file and data paths, poorly implemented file and registry permissions that require administrative user access to run the software, or non-standard GUI implementations.
How does one create a secure OS when the applications that run on it are so poorly written? Vista breaking 3rd party apps was unfortunately a step MS had to make or they would run into more unfair criticism because they didn't do anything to fix security issues. Funny thing is I haven't seen MS apps break yet. Developers for years have been creating "Windows" software but they have been taking shortcuts to avoid the Windows interface. To me, that is the problem and there is no way MS could have made Windows more secure without alienating those broken apps.
So apparently MS has a dll (or in XP's case, a.sys) file that has the capability of identifying a given processor and writing microcode updates to it. In one respect, I can see how this can be useful; on the other respect, if it ever got hacked we could be left with a whole lot of junk CPU's that couldn't be booted from.
You're right, I wasn't really thinking server. I was thinking more about the non-existent Linux 'support' they have on the workstation/desktop side. I've never had to contact server support for linux so I don't know how well or if they give a rat's arse about those customers.
The article is stupid because it's the Inquirer, but they mean the Entire E4000 and E6000 series. What they really mean to say is that every single Core 2 Duo processor is affected.
Patches distributed by Microsoft, for microsoft products. Seems like an MS problem rather than an Intel issue, which kind of makes the title of this article misleading. However, this sounds very similar to the issue with Prescott CPU's and XP SP2, where an installation on a system with a CPU below stepping 8 would hard freeze on restart after the initial setup. In that case the fix was a BIOS update OR disabling L1 and L2 cache.
Terrestrial radio stations are not exempt from the the net rates. A number of local stations in my area which broadcast a live stream on the net are looking at much much higher royalty payments unless this silly ruling gets changed. Even though they are losing money on it, because the ruling requires the payments regardless of whether the station is making any profit.
It doesn't appear that this will affect their main listings on their website, just the programs that tap into their database. I've always just setup an easy shortcut to their web page to get listings, so I really don't think this will affect my usage in the least.
I think there are a lot of custom build shops that will gladly ship you a computer either preinstalled with Ubuntu or X distro of Linux, or without an OS. My shop will do this gladly. Don't expect OS support from everyone but you should at least be able to purchase the hardware.
You might have a point, but this licensing deal is exactly the opposite. Microsoft is not licensing Linspire's technology, they are giving Linspire their technology.
Obviously, free OSS is a threat to Microsoft, but that does not preclude them from leveraging the companies producing them to draw people to their search engine, which = revenue, or helping them cover their rear end in case ODF becomes a real threat to native Office formats.
Judges should not be allowed to preside over these cases unless they have a basic knowledge of computers. I would have to assume that the volatility of RAM was explained to the judge and if he still couldn't understand this udderly basic principle, how is he going to be competent with the remainder of the case?
Fully implement means making this backbone available to ISP's across the country, if they even plan to take it that far. Considering that IPTV and other forms of streaming video have the potential to replace the existing cable structure in many areas, or at least give them competition, I think that it is advantageous to everyone to be able to access this network.
I don't see how cooperation between MS and a Linux vendor hurts that vendor or its customers. The better than linux gets along with Windows, the better a product it will be and will be more likely to be adopted on a larger scale.
Obviously you've never run FSX. Yeah, the game might load on such a machine but you'd be looking at 2-3 fps on the very lowest graphical settings. Not exactly what I'd consider a good gaming platform.
Your whole point reinforces my original opinion. Yeah you can drive on the road with a $500 junker car, but if you want to go fast you buy the high end car. Similarly you can run games on the low end hardware, and yes the X1600 is low end, the card goes for $80. I know folks run FSX on the MacBook Pro or iMac but it ain't pretty. That doesn't bode well for the next generation of games which will demand even more power.
Sure don't know why my parent is modded flamebait, it sure isn't intended to be as I'm just presenting facts. "Can run games" and "Runs games well" are two different statements, and Mac's aren't built to run games well. They don't have to be, because that's not their business model, as another person who replied to this thread pointed out.
Yeah, the 7600GT is a marginally better card than the X1600, but then again it's only offered at the Apple store in the 24" iMac, which is a $2100 computer with that card.
My mistake, yeah the X1900XT is available in the Mac Pro but once again this card is 2 generations old now. However, I don't want to drop $5000 on a system with a card that barely plays today's games and won't be able to handle next year's games.
Frankly, there's not a whole lot of game available on the Mac that will push the envelope, and that's why they can get away with putting underpowered graphics cards in their systems. Thus my point, they just aren't really built for games.
What MS does well is package products that are fairly easy to integrate and work well together out fo the box. Office is a cash cow for MS so they would have no reason to open the source. Microsoft is in business to make money, and satisfying a vast minority of customers who would like them to open up more is far down the priority list. Another similar situation is.... Apple! Asking MS to open up windows or office or any of their software is like asking Apple to GPL OSX. At least Apple has the Ipod business to fall back on.
I think the main reason this is only a show of support rather than real support for the Mac platform, is that the Macs simply are not built for gaming.
Consider: The mac mini has integrated Intel graphics which don't handle any modern games. The best video card available on the iMac is the ATI X1600, which is still not powerful enough to handle newer games and the high resolutions they are played at. Not until you get to the Mac Pros which start at $2500 do you get a system where you can even think about a realistic gaming platform, and even those machines don't come preconfigured with anything more than the X1600.
Yes, you may. But millions of people license software in this manner and have no problems with the arrangement. If there is a level of trust with the vendor, people don't mind having things closed source. I know a lot of folks on/. would probably use software that is GPL'ed and has major functional limitations compared to a similar commercial closed-source product. However, in the business world, the reality is, you have to use what is most efficient and works best for you, even if your up front cost is greater and the custimization of that product on a fundamental level is not an option.
It goes toward Arab oil interests because it penalizes the consumer for using anything but gasoline, therefore shuttling more dollars toward the big oil machine. Yes, you could say that there is no more tax than you would pay for gasoline, but if you're not getting a price break to use alternative fuels, it's not going to happen.
Slashdot Mirror
Considering that the trend is toward making chips with smaller transistors that operate at less voltage and thus at lower temperatures, I don't think that having a few of these ozone-emitting devices around will create a pollution problem. In fact, ozone has quite a beneficial property in correct quantities, including cancer therapy, mold or smoke eradication, even water treatment (most high end swimming pools use ozone rather than very harmful chemicals such as chlorine).
AOL might have popped the bubble due to sheer volume of CD's distributed. I remember when it was cool just to have a CD-ROM drive, and even cooler to have one that was 2X or 4X. You would even pay a bit extra for the convenience of buying something on CD so you wouldn't have to flip floppies to install. And finally you could do cool things like hear audio or watch dinky video clips. But the bubble burst when all that became commonplace and the CD-ROM became just another necessary component, like the floppy drive was for many years.
My point is, eventually they are going to be forced to upgrade, either to Vista or the next gen MS OS, or Linux/OSX/etc. Either way it is going to go along with an application upgrade. I see Vista sales being driven more by application upgrades than anything else, because once the application base is upgraded, businesses will want to upgrade the OS to take advantage of the features that are available including increased security, features like ReadyBoost and ReadyDrive. Ideally, they should have made the clean break with an all 64bit OS, thus killing two birds with one stone.
How much of this is due to lazy software development by 3rd party vendors in the past 12 years since Windows 95 came on the scene? Many of the incompatibilities are due to hard coded file and data paths, poorly implemented file and registry permissions that require administrative user access to run the software, or non-standard GUI implementations. How does one create a secure OS when the applications that run on it are so poorly written? Vista breaking 3rd party apps was unfortunately a step MS had to make or they would run into more unfair criticism because they didn't do anything to fix security issues. Funny thing is I haven't seen MS apps break yet. Developers for years have been creating "Windows" software but they have been taking shortcuts to avoid the Windows interface. To me, that is the problem and there is no way MS could have made Windows more secure without alienating those broken apps.
So apparently MS has a dll (or in XP's case, a .sys) file that has the capability of identifying a given processor and writing microcode updates to it. In one respect, I can see how this can be useful; on the other respect, if it ever got hacked we could be left with a whole lot of junk CPU's that couldn't be booted from.
You're right, I wasn't really thinking server. I was thinking more about the non-existent Linux 'support' they have on the workstation/desktop side. I've never had to contact server support for linux so I don't know how well or if they give a rat's arse about those customers.
The article is stupid because it's the Inquirer, but they mean the Entire E4000 and E6000 series. What they really mean to say is that every single Core 2 Duo processor is affected.
Patches distributed by Microsoft, for microsoft products. Seems like an MS problem rather than an Intel issue, which kind of makes the title of this article misleading.
However, this sounds very similar to the issue with Prescott CPU's and XP SP2, where an installation on a system with a CPU below stepping 8 would hard freeze on restart after the initial setup. In that case the fix was a BIOS update OR disabling L1 and L2 cache.
That's because Dell is pretty much only "Windows only". Why should they care about anything else?
Terrestrial radio stations are not exempt from the the net rates. A number of local stations in my area which broadcast a live stream on the net are looking at much much higher royalty payments unless this silly ruling gets changed. Even though they are losing money on it, because the ruling requires the payments regardless of whether the station is making any profit.
After reading the story about cameras being distributed to monitor the police, I suppose this DA decided his own case was silly. Which it was.
It doesn't appear that this will affect their main listings on their website, just the programs that tap into their database.
I've always just setup an easy shortcut to their web page to get listings, so I really don't think this will affect my usage in the least.
I think there are a lot of custom build shops that will gladly ship you a computer either preinstalled with Ubuntu or X distro of Linux, or without an OS. My shop will do this gladly. Don't expect OS support from everyone but you should at least be able to purchase the hardware.
You might have a point, but this licensing deal is exactly the opposite. Microsoft is not licensing Linspire's technology, they are giving Linspire their technology.
Obviously, free OSS is a threat to Microsoft, but that does not preclude them from leveraging the companies producing them to draw people to their search engine, which = revenue, or helping them cover their rear end in case ODF becomes a real threat to native Office formats.
Judges should not be allowed to preside over these cases unless they have a basic knowledge of computers. I would have to assume that the volatility of RAM was explained to the judge and if he still couldn't understand this udderly basic principle, how is he going to be competent with the remainder of the case?
Fully implement means making this backbone available to ISP's across the country, if they even plan to take it that far. Considering that IPTV and other forms of streaming video have the potential to replace the existing cable structure in many areas, or at least give them competition, I think that it is advantageous to everyone to be able to access this network.
I don't see how cooperation between MS and a Linux vendor hurts that vendor or its customers. The better than linux gets along with Windows, the better a product it will be and will be more likely to be adopted on a larger scale.
Obviously you've never run FSX. Yeah, the game might load on such a machine but you'd be looking at 2-3 fps on the very lowest graphical settings. Not exactly what I'd consider a good gaming platform.
See http://www.internet2.edu/network/library/deploymen t_phases.pdf
Almost as interested as what is covered is what is not yet covered. Does anyone know how long they expect this to take to fully implement?
Your whole point reinforces my original opinion. Yeah you can drive on the road with a $500 junker car, but if you want to go fast you buy the high end car. Similarly you can run games on the low end hardware, and yes the X1600 is low end, the card goes for $80. I know folks run FSX on the MacBook Pro or iMac but it ain't pretty. That doesn't bode well for the next generation of games which will demand even more power. Sure don't know why my parent is modded flamebait, it sure isn't intended to be as I'm just presenting facts. "Can run games" and "Runs games well" are two different statements, and Mac's aren't built to run games well. They don't have to be, because that's not their business model, as another person who replied to this thread pointed out.
Yeah, the 7600GT is a marginally better card than the X1600, but then again it's only offered at the Apple store in the 24" iMac, which is a $2100 computer with that card.
My mistake, yeah the X1900XT is available in the Mac Pro but once again this card is 2 generations old now. However, I don't want to drop $5000 on a system with a card that barely plays today's games and won't be able to handle next year's games.
Frankly, there's not a whole lot of game available on the Mac that will push the envelope, and that's why they can get away with putting underpowered graphics cards in their systems. Thus my point, they just aren't really built for games.
What MS does well is package products that are fairly easy to integrate and work well together out fo the box. Office is a cash cow for MS so they would have no reason to open the source. Microsoft is in business to make money, and satisfying a vast minority of customers who would like them to open up more is far down the priority list. Another similar situation is.... Apple! Asking MS to open up windows or office or any of their software is like asking Apple to GPL OSX. At least Apple has the Ipod business to fall back on.
I think the main reason this is only a show of support rather than real support for the Mac platform, is that the Macs simply are not built for gaming.
Consider: The mac mini has integrated Intel graphics which don't handle any modern games. The best video card available on the iMac is the ATI X1600, which is still not powerful enough to handle newer games and the high resolutions they are played at. Not until you get to the Mac Pros which start at $2500 do you get a system where you can even think about a realistic gaming platform, and even those machines don't come preconfigured with anything more than the X1600.
Yes, you may. But millions of people license software in this manner and have no problems with the arrangement. If there is a level of trust with the vendor, people don't mind having things closed source. I know a lot of folks on /. would probably use software that is GPL'ed and has major functional limitations compared to a similar commercial closed-source product. However, in the business world, the reality is, you have to use what is most efficient and works best for you, even if your up front cost is greater and the custimization of that product on a fundamental level is not an option.
It goes toward Arab oil interests because it penalizes the consumer for using anything but gasoline, therefore shuttling more dollars toward the big oil machine. Yes, you could say that there is no more tax than you would pay for gasoline, but if you're not getting a price break to use alternative fuels, it's not going to happen.