Obviously, you'd have some energy loss.... but mostly, why wouldn't this work? I'm not scientist or electrical engineer, but I would think you could point a light beam from the sun using mirrors into a chamber full of mirrors and that also had solar panels in it.........
Good list, but I'd also list Linux kernel 2.2 since I used to run it on an SMP system back in the day. I can't comment on pre-2.2 because I didn't have an smp system back then, but other than that, good list.
This would NEVER work, mainly because if I live on the border of Nebraska and Colorado, but in Colorado, and let's say I drive more in Nebraska at a ratio of 90% to 10%. Yet, I would pay Colorado all the taxes. It doesn't make any sense.
Re:So much easier to knock down than to build up
on
Top 10 Apple Flops
·
· Score: 1
I think you're right on some points, however I highly doubt they will have 95% of the mp3 market... their flash based products are insanely expensive when you compare them to others on the market. The ipod is ok-priced for what it offers, while the ipod mini is going to die because of it's $249 price tag.
Exactly! I'm glad somebody else said it, because when I've brought it up, I've been modded as a troll or flamed. I HATE Mozilla's bloated interface odd quirks with mail, like the stupid blue lines when you compose a message instead of the > markers which normally represent the test of the email you're replying too. In Mozilla, there is no way to remove those, but in thunderbird you're back to where I want to be - editing a plain text message without all the crap formatting, like those blue lines for example. Firefox and Thunderbird are great products - but yes, it would be nice if those two were integrated....
This is just wrong - simply a conflict of interests. Microsoft will sell this product I'm sure, and they also sell windows. There is nothing stopping them from ignoring holes in windows that spyware exploit regularily, but wa-la, they now have software to "fix" it up for you at an additional cost. What a bunch of crap.
Well, you're lucky then. Those of us in the IT support field running even the latest SP2 on XP Pro can tell you that an IE crash can and does take down your whole box. It all depends on what IE was trying to do before the crash.
Re:Take it From the User Perspective
on
Firefox vs. SP2's IE?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Yeah, I agree, mostly. But here are some good reasons to still make the switch:
1) The way pop-ups are blocked. Using Firefox, only *auto* popups like ads are blocked. A window you want to open by clicking a button or a link will still open, which is a good thing. In IE, even if you want the window to open by clicking a link or button, it will not. That's a really stupid way to block popups.
2) Stability. When Firefox crashes, it won't take your whole machine with it. IE will. That's bad.
3) Firefox is NOT tied into the OS, making it less risky to use when surfing the web. No matter how many bugs M$ fixes, people will always find more with IE. And since IE is tied to the OS, you're a greater risk just by using it.
So, while your Grandpa may not know this stuff, you might want to let him know these things.
Yeah, but get this - that would mean you're running Apache as root, or all your web files are owned by the Apache user or user group. This worm can only modify files owned by Apache, or atleast the user running apache. So, that would mean your backups were mounted or apache has the ability to mount the drive. Scary either way, and this might be a good time to check that sort of thing. I got hit by the stupid worm as well, but only my php files in one directory got borked because I had the files owned by apache.
No, I haven't switched - you just have some drive to argue with me. I have repeatedly said that names suck, and posting the actual specs of the processor, NOT just the mhz, would better inform consumers. I have not once deviated from this opinion, it is you that is extremely arugmenitive.
That's my point - people would read the packaging and not the retarded name the cpu was given. People would actually buy products based on real specs and not some marketing slogan they say blue men dance to on TV.
If all the technical specs of each cpu, including cache, FSB, pipeline, etc were all displayed on the packaging, it would be simple to tell the difference. When people looked at the cache number of the two cpus, the celeron would be laughed at.
Depends on a hell of a lot, really. For example, say you combine a P4 with an Intel manufactured board. You're going to get rock solid stability 99% of the time. But let's say you take a board manufactured by Abit or some other OEM, but it happens to have an intel chipset on it. You may or may no get the same stability. AMD does not make their own mobo's, so you always have to go with an OEM like Abit. Depending on chipset, you usually get what you pay for. Companies like Abit, MSI, Gigabyte, etc all seem pretty respectable if you stick to an Nvidia chipset. The via ones have always killed me though - and so have companies like PC Chips, Biostar, etc.
Wow, wish I had mod points - that's extremely informative. That explains the retarded names from Intel and AMD ever since then. Such examples of horrible names - Athlon XP, Centrino, etc. I prefer 1.4 GHZ 686 myself. You know exactly what you're getting then, same goes for the stupid PR numbers.
"use a test print from the printer they find on your desk"
You obviously didn't read my comments above to other posts saying the same as you - I highly doubt any criminal is going to print money and leave the damn printer on his desk, or even in their own homes. Those who do deserve jail time, and probably would have been caught long before police start comparing printers.
Yeah, and if you're dumb enough to actually print money in your home, and then go use it, then yes you deserve to go to jail. However, I doubt many counterfitters leave their illicit gear in their own home....
You don't need a $10,000 to print realistic looking money for your information. A $150 apparently does just fine, not that I would know.... but many, many others in this country have gotten by just fine using the latest HP and some resume paper from Best Buy.
1) I never register a printer with the manufacturer after I purchase it. I also don't know anybody else who did either. It's a waste of time and an invasion of privacy.
2) Let's say a printer was never registered - and it was paid for with cash at a store like Best Buy. Good luck tracking down the buyer.
3) Even if both the above were not true and the manfucturer knew who originally bought it, one word foils their plans: Ebay. If you buy a printer on ebay, who knows how many hands it's been through before yours. While it is still possible to track it after a sale on ebay, it just got a whole hell of a lot harder.
Oh no, I remember the K5 very well. I also remember the Cyrix PR233 chips, etc. Those chips didn't at all compare the Pentium at the time. I also didn't like the K6 either... the K6-2 was respectible, but it had such limited cache that it couldn't hange with the PII. However, I thought we were only talking about Athlon line of chips. My mistake.
Completely depends on the platform. The KT333 chipset for the Athlon XP was a joke, but I'm still unsure if it's the fault of the motherboard manufacturer or VIA. Each one of those KT333 boards I had died in less than one year's time. I'm not slouch at building systems either, I had good power supplies, memory, plenty of cooling, etc. I've build hundreds of systems for my company, and I've never seen such horrible boards. They were Abit boards, and they worked fine until they eventually became unstable and then refused to even turn on anymore. Replaced them with Nforce 2 based Abit boards (NF7-S to be exact) and I'm loving those new boards. I also had a friend with a KT400 based board, and his machine was not as reliable as he would have liked. I will say one thing though, I know a lot of people with great Via based boards, most of which are based on the KT266 chipset. I still have an MSI board based on this chipset, and I also built 3 other systems with the same board for friends, and all are still running to this day without any issues at all. I'm not trying to say Via is a horrible company, but after the 686b issues where I didn't get my money back for a bunch of crappy boards because Via refused to acknowledge a massive defect, and then the KT333 mess, I haven't touched Via since. I can't comment on the A64 products they put out because I haven't tried them, and probably never will.
I agree with you on one point - the motherboard situation was horrible at first... and still is if you buy a motherboard with a VIA chipset on it. Then again, I had the exact same problem with Intel based boards using VIA chipets. Just google for "via 686b" and you'll be bombarded with horror stories and "bios fixes" to get around that awful south bridge.
I do however disagree with you on the performance ratings. Almost every time AMD rates a chip, it outperforms the Intel counterpart, depending on benchmark ofcourse. I'd like to see some evidence of where you say their PR ratings didn't live up to expectations. I can't think of any examples right now where they didn't. I can think of the first Athlon XP chips hitting the market with these ratings, and how the 1800+ crushed the Pentium 4 1.8 GHZ. I also know that my XP 2500+ dominates a P4 2.4 ghz - but that's where things get messy. For starters, the P4 2.4 came in many different flavors, some with a 533 FSB while others have 800. So, the 2.4 P4 can and does beat the Athlon XP 2500+ in some situations. I don't think AMD has misled anyone though, their processors are either right on par with Intel's, or even ahead in some cases. It all just depends on how you bench them, and what steppings, drivers, etc you use.
Slashdot Mirror
Obviously, you'd have some energy loss.... but mostly, why wouldn't this work? I'm not scientist or electrical engineer, but I would think you could point a light beam from the sun using mirrors into a chamber full of mirrors and that also had solar panels in it.........
Good list, but I'd also list Linux kernel 2.2 since I used to run it on an SMP system back in the day. I can't comment on pre-2.2 because I didn't have an smp system back then, but other than that, good list.
This would NEVER work, mainly because if I live on the border of Nebraska and Colorado, but in Colorado, and let's say I drive more in Nebraska at a ratio of 90% to 10%. Yet, I would pay Colorado all the taxes. It doesn't make any sense.
I think you're right on some points, however I highly doubt they will have 95% of the mp3 market... their flash based products are insanely expensive when you compare them to others on the market. The ipod is ok-priced for what it offers, while the ipod mini is going to die because of it's $249 price tag.
Exactly! I'm glad somebody else said it, because when I've brought it up, I've been modded as a troll or flamed. I HATE Mozilla's bloated interface odd quirks with mail, like the stupid blue lines when you compose a message instead of the > markers which normally represent the test of the email you're replying too. In Mozilla, there is no way to remove those, but in thunderbird you're back to where I want to be - editing a plain text message without all the crap formatting, like those blue lines for example. Firefox and Thunderbird are great products - but yes, it would be nice if those two were integrated....
This is just wrong - simply a conflict of interests. Microsoft will sell this product I'm sure, and they also sell windows. There is nothing stopping them from ignoring holes in windows that spyware exploit regularily, but wa-la, they now have software to "fix" it up for you at an additional cost. What a bunch of crap.
Well, you're lucky then. Those of us in the IT support field running even the latest SP2 on XP Pro can tell you that an IE crash can and does take down your whole box. It all depends on what IE was trying to do before the crash.
Yeah, I agree, mostly. But here are some good reasons to still make the switch:
1) The way pop-ups are blocked. Using Firefox, only *auto* popups like ads are blocked. A window you want to open by clicking a button or a link will still open, which is a good thing. In IE, even if you want the window to open by clicking a link or button, it will not. That's a really stupid way to block popups.
2) Stability. When Firefox crashes, it won't take your whole machine with it. IE will. That's bad.
3) Firefox is NOT tied into the OS, making it less risky to use when surfing the web. No matter how many bugs M$ fixes, people will always find more with IE. And since IE is tied to the OS, you're a greater risk just by using it.
So, while your Grandpa may not know this stuff, you might want to let him know these things.
Yeah, but get this - that would mean you're running Apache as root, or all your web files are owned by the Apache user or user group. This worm can only modify files owned by Apache, or atleast the user running apache. So, that would mean your backups were mounted or apache has the ability to mount the drive. Scary either way, and this might be a good time to check that sort of thing. I got hit by the stupid worm as well, but only my php files in one directory got borked because I had the files owned by apache.
That's awesome - hopefully that thing is behind a firewall or two, because hasn't there been several exploits since then?
Not really... read it again, they talk about removing the stuff from the new CPUs for AMD and IBM. From what I understand Intel does not remove it.
No, I haven't switched - you just have some drive to argue with me. I have repeatedly said that names suck, and posting the actual specs of the processor, NOT just the mhz, would better inform consumers. I have not once deviated from this opinion, it is you that is extremely arugmenitive.
That's my point - people would read the packaging and not the retarded name the cpu was given. People would actually buy products based on real specs and not some marketing slogan they say blue men dance to on TV.
If all the technical specs of each cpu, including cache, FSB, pipeline, etc were all displayed on the packaging, it would be simple to tell the difference. When people looked at the cache number of the two cpus, the celeron would be laughed at.
Depends on a hell of a lot, really. For example, say you combine a P4 with an Intel manufactured board. You're going to get rock solid stability 99% of the time. But let's say you take a board manufactured by Abit or some other OEM, but it happens to have an intel chipset on it. You may or may no get the same stability. AMD does not make their own mobo's, so you always have to go with an OEM like Abit. Depending on chipset, you usually get what you pay for. Companies like Abit, MSI, Gigabyte, etc all seem pretty respectable if you stick to an Nvidia chipset. The via ones have always killed me though - and so have companies like PC Chips, Biostar, etc.
Wow, wish I had mod points - that's extremely informative. That explains the retarded names from Intel and AMD ever since then. Such examples of horrible names - Athlon XP, Centrino, etc. I prefer 1.4 GHZ 686 myself. You know exactly what you're getting then, same goes for the stupid PR numbers.
"use a test print from the printer they find on your desk"
You obviously didn't read my comments above to other posts saying the same as you - I highly doubt any criminal is going to print money and leave the damn printer on his desk, or even in their own homes. Those who do deserve jail time, and probably would have been caught long before police start comparing printers.
Yeah, and if you're dumb enough to actually print money in your home, and then go use it, then yes you deserve to go to jail. However, I doubt many counterfitters leave their illicit gear in their own home....
You don't need a $10,000 to print realistic looking money for your information. A $150 apparently does just fine, not that I would know.... but many, many others in this country have gotten by just fine using the latest HP and some resume paper from Best Buy.
This is hilarious for several reasons.
1) I never register a printer with the manufacturer after I purchase it. I also don't know anybody else who did either. It's a waste of time and an invasion of privacy.
2) Let's say a printer was never registered - and it was paid for with cash at a store like Best Buy. Good luck tracking down the buyer.
3) Even if both the above were not true and the manfucturer knew who originally bought it, one word foils their plans: Ebay. If you buy a printer on ebay, who knows how many hands it's been through before yours. While it is still possible to track it after a sale on ebay, it just got a whole hell of a lot harder.
Yes, but with a CPU, that's damn near impossible unless you're talking about a VIA chip.
Oh no, I remember the K5 very well. I also remember the Cyrix PR233 chips, etc. Those chips didn't at all compare the Pentium at the time. I also didn't like the K6 either... the K6-2 was respectible, but it had such limited cache that it couldn't hange with the PII. However, I thought we were only talking about Athlon line of chips. My mistake.
Completely depends on the platform. The KT333 chipset for the Athlon XP was a joke, but I'm still unsure if it's the fault of the motherboard manufacturer or VIA. Each one of those KT333 boards I had died in less than one year's time. I'm not slouch at building systems either, I had good power supplies, memory, plenty of cooling, etc. I've build hundreds of systems for my company, and I've never seen such horrible boards. They were Abit boards, and they worked fine until they eventually became unstable and then refused to even turn on anymore. Replaced them with Nforce 2 based Abit boards (NF7-S to be exact) and I'm loving those new boards. I also had a friend with a KT400 based board, and his machine was not as reliable as he would have liked. I will say one thing though, I know a lot of people with great Via based boards, most of which are based on the KT266 chipset. I still have an MSI board based on this chipset, and I also built 3 other systems with the same board for friends, and all are still running to this day without any issues at all. I'm not trying to say Via is a horrible company, but after the 686b issues where I didn't get my money back for a bunch of crappy boards because Via refused to acknowledge a massive defect, and then the KT333 mess, I haven't touched Via since. I can't comment on the A64 products they put out because I haven't tried them, and probably never will.
I agree with you on one point - the motherboard situation was horrible at first... and still is if you buy a motherboard with a VIA chipset on it. Then again, I had the exact same problem with Intel based boards using VIA chipets. Just google for "via 686b" and you'll be bombarded with horror stories and "bios fixes" to get around that awful south bridge.
I do however disagree with you on the performance ratings. Almost every time AMD rates a chip, it outperforms the Intel counterpart, depending on benchmark ofcourse. I'd like to see some evidence of where you say their PR ratings didn't live up to expectations. I can't think of any examples right now where they didn't. I can think of the first Athlon XP chips hitting the market with these ratings, and how the 1800+ crushed the Pentium 4 1.8 GHZ. I also know that my XP 2500+ dominates a P4 2.4 ghz - but that's where things get messy. For starters, the P4 2.4 came in many different flavors, some with a 533 FSB while others have 800. So, the 2.4 P4 can and does beat the Athlon XP 2500+ in some situations. I don't think AMD has misled anyone though, their processors are either right on par with Intel's, or even ahead in some cases. It all just depends on how you bench them, and what steppings, drivers, etc you use.
Clearly, you need to brush up on your uses of the word fuck:
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/fwordflash.html