Gigahertz race is back on! AMD increases the clockrate of its chips to 3 GHz! Ok.. race is over.
Slows news day? When people announced GHz race is over they didn't mean that they'll only decrease the clockrate didn't they? Both Intel and AMD still bump the clock rate up on further developments of their models, but we should expect that we'll be seeing chips in the range of 1 GHz - 3.8 GHz and no higher than this.
Yeah, this is cool, no doubt. How many users actually *use* how much power they already have? I use a lot, but it's mostly dependent on the graphics card.
I assume we're talking casual consumers and not pro users. Well, it's not really up to them, their software will bloat up to take whatever CPU "volume" there is and take all of it in the next version.
At a first glance Photoshop 4 isn't THAT much simpler than Photoshop 10. But it's plenty times faster for all basic operations both support. Wonder how that happened, no..
Windows itself, now takes seconds to do what used used to be zero time instant action in the likes of Windows 95.
Funny how we in the free world survives without these patents.
Don't be so brave to claim your world "the free world". Last time this happened to USA and see where they are now. Europe is on the track to follow them.
From the wording of the patent (overly broad of course), other affected may be:
Adobe's FLEX platform (the XML language being MXML) Sun's Java JSP W3C (the language being.. XHTML)
as well as smaller players like Laszlo and a myriad of other platforms with a procedural part and declarative part in XML (including platforms I've written myself for PHP and Java).
It's laughable, I hope the court acknowledges the loads of prior art. Few years ago someone patented interactrive CMS system (i.e. web appsf or managing sites) and the community was outraged, as the patent was directed straight at everyone using Java/Flash/JS for creating online CMS systems in the form of rich internet applications. The "reference" implementation used Flash.
Nothing came out of it. My advice is don't worry and let Microsoft take care of those clowns (hopefully this doesn't pan out like the Eolas case).
the thing I don't get is... The guy's apparently successfully reading very weak signals, why can't we use this to create much faster/more stable wifi connections?
Go take a look at the ads for the iphone on Apple's site. Here's what you WON'T hear: MIKE: I need to call Chet ask him about that spreadsheet...
You know, I'm really surprised how easy it is to manipulate the public opinion. Now we have ourselves a hatred against spreadsheets and charts now. The Apple ads say that you're a boring suit if you use a chart!
I'm a designer, I use spreadsheets for my personal budget, tracking my projects and other items. I'm by no means a "suit". As someone who's older than 18, I have the boring responsibility of managing my daily life, but of course I wish I could spend every day just hanging out in bars and showing off my shiny iPhone gadgets.
No amount of market research can guess what your users will want at any point, since it's not the same thing that all of them want. Apparently though brainwashing compensates for this just fine.
I never found iPod attractive (it's expensive, it's got a spinnning hard drive in it, it's huge, can't act as a mass storage USB stick, has no FM radio etc.).
iPhone looks to me as spending a week to prepare the best cake in the world, and then pissing on it, by locking it for external applications. I'm sure the average teen will simply love it.
Office is an application suite. ODF is a document format. They're apples and oranges.
You know, I'm happy for you're so naive, it's a bless. Office application suites compete on features, and as such, each is bound to either extend ODF into a mess, or introduce their own formats if they don't have any.
There's a reason why we have "source" formats, and "final" formats. I don't need your browser to support the latest effects and features in Photoshop, since I'll export it to JPG/GIF/PNG for you, that preserves presentation, but not editability.
We already have our "common" document format, and that's PDF. Remember my words that ODF isn't going anywhere. There's simply no reason for it to succeed.
Sure the only open source ones are OpenOffice and KOffice, but many small 3rd party wordprocessors have changed to ODF. So at no point will we be trapped by Sun
"Supporting ODF" is a very vague statement. OpenOffice and many small 3rd party word processors support Ms Word.DOC format too. Then how, all of a sudden we need ODF then, if a bit of 3rd party support takes care of the issue at hand.
Waitaminute here -- why do you switch from talking about ODF to talking about OpenOffice? Unlike OpenXML, ODF was written based not on a single application's requirements
I'm sorry but you're dead wrong right there, which kinda makes the rest of your post pointless. Read up on ODF and how it was created.
Yes, ODF is IMO flawed, but at the moment we don't have a better alternative, do we?
That might be quite unpopular with the crowd here, but right now, MS Office is the better alternative.
Have you actually reviewed Office 2007? Unlike previous versions, they've made incredible improvements in the whole suite, and I'm not just talking about the ribbon UI.
When you have to select a piece of software for doing real work with it, you don't just weigh in the license cost and claim anything free and open is always better. Or well, you don't do it if you have some hard and very real work to do, but you might do it if you don't, and just have an agenda to follow for the hell of it.
I need to be productive and be compatible with the rest of the world. MS Office just wins here, if Sun thinks they have the resources and skills to outdo (or at least match) MS Office in quality and features we need, I'm always ready to reconsider. This day hasn't come yet.
Playing the numbers game, if a country as large as China were to adopt ODF (via harmonizing with it), it's game over, and ODF wins. That wouldn't spell the end for Microsoft's XML standard, but it would be a major setback, globally speaking. I wish him luck.
Why do you wish him luck exactly. Both formats are terribly flawed, and although one may have reasons to stay way from MS Office, OpenOffice's features are quite limited and outdated, compared.
Don't fool yourself: this is not some noble battle of OSS vs evil Microsoft, it's just a battle of Sun versus Microsoft, which none of them deserves to win.
How many times should this story repeat until slashdotters learn: all corporations are the same. Not soon after ODF takes over MS Office, we'll be running daily articles of the "but... Sun promised to not be evil!" kind, just like we're doing with former favorites Google, Red Hat, Novell, Adobe etc. etc.
Haven't you heard an expression: customer is always right?
You apparently don't understand what this means. It means the customer should be offered what he wants, versus argue with him. It doesn't mean the customer isn't, sometimes, in fact a bleeping idiot who is as wrong as it gets.
It's perfectly fine to not want to be an early Vista adopter. But, regardless of one's opinion of Vista's features or initial quality, spending money on old WinXP at this point is like throwing your money away.
Currently you're participating in a logical fallacy called "loss aversion". This is when trying to decide which way to go when presented multiple options, even the smallest loss outweighs the greatest possible benefit.
If you buy XP now, you get an OS that does its work NOW, runs the software you need NOW, and does it with longer battery life (for mobile computers), more stability and more predictability.
XP will be supported at least 5-6 more solid years by all software makers, game makers, hardware makers and even Microsoft itself, with its Windows Update patches.
By the end of those 5-6 years, the computer you bought right now will be obsolete and you'll need to buy a new one, but you'd have 5-6 productive years without compatibility and performance issues. Your time, is after all, most expensive of all.
What do you choose? You choose instead to get a machine with a flawed setup, and put up with all the problems of being an early adopter, just because it's impossibly stupid, in your mind, to waste those $50 on an XP license versus a Vista license. And all that, while your laptop maybe well over $1000 in price. And while you can upgrade later on the same machine. And so on and so on.
The title of your post "Dumb People" is just the cherry on top now, isn't it.
People have this amazing realization when they see their computer running 1 month straight with Linux and Mac: Windows was a piece of crap, and it is not normal to have to reboot more than a 1-2 times a year.
Can *you* run month straight without sleeping? You, freak?
Is electricity free over there? What the hell's with you nerdlings and your "I don't need to reboot a whole month" mania. Why the hell cares or needs this?!
That said, I, as a nerd, who also runs Windows XP (holy mama of logical conflict!), usually leave my PC on all the time, so I can defragment, index, and download crap every night.
I don't reboot for weeks and months at a time, because I'm a damn nerd. So what, should I fucking call CNN now and tell them about my uptime?
Also do you realize that all those huge sites based on.NET services run on Windows server? How often do you think they reboot?
That's a very good question, and in spite of all the theories people will throw around, I'm not sure Microsoft even knows the answer.
Microsoft has survived so far because it knows the answer, however.
Software gets obsolete very VERY fast. Microsoft tries to anticipate the needs and lacks of Windows, and build them into their next version as soon as possible, this ensures their long-term success.
What would happen if they didn't? People would use XP for some years to come, but as competing solutions that seemed marginal (Linux, OSX) improve, their benefits will become more apparent and lucrative. People would consider switching from Windows, when at some point, the benefits of compatibility fall below the harm done by the fact that Windows has become terribly out of date.
It's really odd, you know. A software that was the best among its peers, considered secure, bug free, stable, fast... if left stale for some time, starts looking real bad in all those categories. Do you want an actual example?
Internet Explorer. Some Slashdot posters with shorter memory may have forgotten, but IE was ages ahead on all those accounts compared to Netscape 4. But leave IE stale for 5-6 years.. and people started switching to Firefox.
This is what awaits Windows (of course it'll be a much slower process), if Microsoft doesn't get their act on Windows releases (such as Vista).
I think you're wrong here: as hateful as XP was, it was a relief compared to such gems as Windows 98 or ME
Have you tried Windows 98 recently? You'll be surprised how snappy it is on a Celeron 300MHz, much faster than XP on 3GHz machine.
I remember people boo-ed at XP's system requirements for a long time when it came out. It was Vista all over again. Learn from your past, and best of all, don't forget it.
Windows 98 was a nice OS for its time, XP was a nice OS for its time, and Vista may be a nice OS for it's (still coming up) time. They were all hated when introduced because: a) it's a change, people hate change b) software needs time to catch up c) hardware needs time to catch up d) microsoft needs to do some patching to get the initial flaws out
Yes, statistical significance is attainable but only if the sample is representative (i.e.) is random.
Actually "random" would be the opposite of "representative", as long as statistics are concerned. Represenative means the same proportions of the subgroups in the samples are the same as the whole. The subgroups should be carefully chosen to represent properly what could bias or change the outcome of the results.
As an extremely simple example, you want in the sample to have the same proportions of age, gender, income, professions etc (some of those categories may not matter in certain studies).
Is the lack of good font control. Lack of kerning is one thing.
Kerning is a domain of the font definition, not CSS. Don't be stupid: would you really supply endless number of kenring pairs in your CSS for every page you do, if CSS had that?
Do you have any idea how much time it takes to create a properly kerned font? More time than it might take you to do your site.
The whole article on Wired is pointless, and wrong. Most new fonts shipped today, and the default fonts shipped with Mac and Windows, have and make use of, kerning information.
I'm happy, however, that Wired discovered something that's mainstream on computers for quite some years now.
Point re: the java applets was that they are still ubiquitous,
Last time I saw a Java applet (and I browse the net a lot, it's kinda an aspect of my job) was two years ago on some dubious casino game site.
And it wouldn't run since of course I didn't have the JRE plugin enabled. They were in the process of converting their site to flash which was noted in an excuse note in the page footer.
Never mind IE, the idiots I'd like to kick the shit out of are the ones who do a website entirely in Flash!
Full Flash sites are animated game, movie sites, which really have an interactive experience and series of photos/trailers to offer, more than any information.
But never mind Flash sites, the idiots I'd like to kick the shit out of are the ones who think site owners owe them something for going to their site. If you don't like it, don't browse it, I like artsy interactive sites just fine.
Thanks for your interest in Movielink, the leading movie download service. Sorry, but Movielink is presently unavailable to users outside of the United States.
If you are a current customer of Movielink and believe you have reached this page in error, please access Live Chat with Customer Service under Help in your Movielink Manager.
Your IP address is --.--.--.--
And what's with the "Your IP address is"? Is the message "we got our eye on you, terrorist!" or what? Am I supposed to feel guilty I'm outside USA?
Or maybe they're just friendly and want me to make sure I know what my IP is.
I find it amusing you are complaining about the size of the JVM given until recently many people were routinely spawning an applet per hover button (yes, stupid people). Still was treated as completely normal
Excuse me but why exactly do we take as a reference what do stupid people consider for "normal"?
Not sure where you are getting the 1M runtime from.
You're really good you know that? The Windows runtime is 1MB. Which is what most people use, since surprisingly that's the dominant desktop OS (and most of the Linux installations are servers, which surpisingly don't need Flash).
The reason Mac OS Flash is bigger (2-3 MB) is because it's a MacTel version, and for similar reasons the Linux version is biggest, since it has to run on a bunch of distros, with a bunch of media subsystems and a bunch of sound subsystems, I really don't wish multimedia app implementation for Linux to be given to even my worst enemy.
Ok, to sum it up: it's normal to use Java applets for rollover buttons, using Flash over Java is "handicapping" yourself (what exactly so crucial for a web app is Flash missing?), and let's take Linux as the desktop OS for reference, since it's the most spread one. I feel smarter.
Surely you cannot say there is no doubt to the existence of solely 3 dimensions? For one, how would you explain the instantaneous communicative nature of spinning quantum particles?
You assume two particles should touch each other or somehow share a space or dimension, to communicate.
Given we've most likely only uncovered a fraction of what the universe works like, what if the apparent model of the universe is "run" in another model that ties it all together.
As a blatantly simplified example: how does a computer game hero understand what's outside the computer?
Few conclusions follow:
- it may be impossible to ever understand how the universe works, since we're inside it (doesn't mean we should EVER stop trying) - it's not up to dimensions. You may add hundreds of dimensions and you again can't approximate the "hidden model".
Slashdot Mirror
Gigahertz race is back on! AMD increases the clockrate of its chips to 3 GHz! Ok.. race is over.
Slows news day? When people announced GHz race is over they didn't mean that they'll only decrease the clockrate didn't they? Both Intel and AMD still bump the clock rate up on further developments of their models, but we should expect that we'll be seeing chips in the range of 1 GHz - 3.8 GHz and no higher than this.
There no effin GHz race.
Yeah, this is cool, no doubt. How many users actually *use* how much power they already have? I use a lot, but it's mostly dependent on the graphics card.
I assume we're talking casual consumers and not pro users. Well, it's not really up to them, their software will bloat up to take whatever CPU "volume" there is and take all of it in the next version.
At a first glance Photoshop 4 isn't THAT much simpler than Photoshop 10. But it's plenty times faster for all basic operations both support. Wonder how that happened, no..
Windows itself, now takes seconds to do what used used to be zero time instant action in the likes of Windows 95.
Funny how we in the free world survives without these patents.
Don't be so brave to claim your world "the free world". Last time this happened to USA and see where they are now. Europe is on the track to follow them.
From the wording of the patent (overly broad of course), other affected may be:
Adobe's FLEX platform (the XML language being MXML)
Sun's Java JSP
W3C (the language being.. XHTML)
as well as smaller players like Laszlo and a myriad of other platforms with a procedural part and declarative part in XML (including platforms I've written myself for PHP and Java).
It's laughable, I hope the court acknowledges the loads of prior art. Few years ago someone patented interactrive CMS system (i.e. web appsf or managing sites) and the community was outraged, as the patent was directed straight at everyone using Java/Flash/JS for creating online CMS systems in the form of rich internet applications. The "reference" implementation used Flash.
Nothing came out of it. My advice is don't worry and let Microsoft take care of those clowns (hopefully this doesn't pan out like the Eolas case).
the thing I don't get is... The guy's apparently successfully reading very weak signals, why can't we use this to create much faster/more stable wifi connections?
I'd buy it because it can't run Microsoft OfficeBloat 2007. I've uninstalled that program TWICE now... know what I use? Wordpad.
I guess that explains why they dumped Wordpad from Vista.
Wordpad: MS Office's worst enemy.
Go take a look at the ads for the iphone on Apple's site. Here's what you WON'T hear:
MIKE: I need to call Chet ask him about that spreadsheet...
You know, I'm really surprised how easy it is to manipulate the public opinion. Now we have ourselves a hatred against spreadsheets and charts now. The Apple ads say that you're a boring suit if you use a chart!
I'm a designer, I use spreadsheets for my personal budget, tracking my projects and other items. I'm by no means a "suit". As someone who's older than 18, I have the boring responsibility of managing my daily life, but of course I wish I could spend every day just hanging out in bars and showing off my shiny iPhone gadgets.
No amount of market research can guess what your users will want at any point, since it's not the same thing that all of them want. Apparently though brainwashing compensates for this just fine.
I never found iPod attractive (it's expensive, it's got a spinnning hard drive in it, it's huge, can't act as a mass storage USB stick, has no FM radio etc.).
iPhone looks to me as spending a week to prepare the best cake in the world, and then pissing on it, by locking it for external applications. I'm sure the average teen will simply love it.
Office is an application suite. ODF is a document format. They're apples and oranges.
You know, I'm happy for you're so naive, it's a bless. Office application suites compete on features, and as such, each is bound to either extend ODF into a mess, or introduce their own formats if they don't have any.
There's a reason why we have "source" formats, and "final" formats. I don't need your browser to support the latest effects and features in Photoshop, since I'll export it to JPG/GIF/PNG for you, that preserves presentation, but not editability.
We already have our "common" document format, and that's PDF. Remember my words that ODF isn't going anywhere. There's simply no reason for it to succeed.
Sure the only open source ones are OpenOffice and KOffice, but many small 3rd party wordprocessors have changed to ODF. So at no point will we be trapped by Sun
.DOC format too. Then how, all of a sudden we need ODF then, if a bit of 3rd party support takes care of the issue at hand.
"Supporting ODF" is a very vague statement. OpenOffice and many small 3rd party word processors support Ms Word
Waitaminute here -- why do you switch from talking about ODF to talking about OpenOffice? Unlike OpenXML, ODF was written based not on a single application's requirements
I'm sorry but you're dead wrong right there, which kinda makes the rest of your post pointless. Read up on ODF and how it was created.
Yes, ODF is IMO flawed, but at the moment we don't have a better alternative, do we?
That might be quite unpopular with the crowd here, but right now, MS Office is the better alternative.
Have you actually reviewed Office 2007? Unlike previous versions, they've made incredible improvements in the whole suite, and I'm not just talking about the ribbon UI.
When you have to select a piece of software for doing real work with it, you don't just weigh in the license cost and claim anything free and open is always better. Or well, you don't do it if you have some hard and very real work to do, but you might do it if you don't, and just have an agenda to follow for the hell of it.
I need to be productive and be compatible with the rest of the world. MS Office just wins here, if Sun thinks they have the resources and skills to outdo (or at least match) MS Office in quality and features we need, I'm always ready to reconsider. This day hasn't come yet.
Playing the numbers game, if a country as large as China were to adopt ODF (via harmonizing with it), it's game over, and ODF wins. That wouldn't spell the end for Microsoft's XML standard, but it would be a major setback, globally speaking. I wish him luck.
... Sun promised to not be evil!" kind, just like we're doing with former favorites Google, Red Hat, Novell, Adobe etc. etc.
Why do you wish him luck exactly. Both formats are terribly flawed, and although one may have reasons to stay way from MS Office, OpenOffice's features are quite limited and outdated, compared.
Don't fool yourself: this is not some noble battle of OSS vs evil Microsoft, it's just a battle of Sun versus Microsoft, which none of them deserves to win.
How many times should this story repeat until slashdotters learn: all corporations are the same. Not soon after ODF takes over MS Office, we'll be running daily articles of the "but
Haven't you heard an expression: customer is always right?
You apparently don't understand what this means. It means the customer should be offered what he wants, versus argue with him. It doesn't mean the customer isn't, sometimes, in fact a bleeping idiot who is as wrong as it gets.
It's perfectly fine to not want to be an early Vista adopter. But, regardless of one's opinion of Vista's features or initial quality, spending money on old WinXP at this point is like throwing your money away.
Currently you're participating in a logical fallacy called "loss aversion". This is when trying to decide which way to go when presented multiple options, even the smallest loss outweighs the greatest possible benefit.
If you buy XP now, you get an OS that does its work NOW, runs the software you need NOW, and does it with longer battery life (for mobile computers), more stability and more predictability.
XP will be supported at least 5-6 more solid years by all software makers, game makers, hardware makers and even Microsoft itself, with its Windows Update patches.
By the end of those 5-6 years, the computer you bought right now will be obsolete and you'll need to buy a new one, but you'd have 5-6 productive years without compatibility and performance issues. Your time, is after all, most expensive of all.
What do you choose? You choose instead to get a machine with a flawed setup, and put up with all the problems of being an early adopter, just because it's impossibly stupid, in your mind, to waste those $50 on an XP license versus a Vista license. And all that, while your laptop maybe well over $1000 in price. And while you can upgrade later on the same machine. And so on and so on.
The title of your post "Dumb People" is just the cherry on top now, isn't it.
People have this amazing realization when they see their computer running 1 month straight with Linux and Mac: Windows was a piece of crap, and it is not normal to have to reboot more than a 1-2 times a year.
.NET services run on Windows server? How often do you think they reboot?
Can *you* run month straight without sleeping? You, freak?
Is electricity free over there? What the hell's with you nerdlings and your "I don't need to reboot a whole month" mania. Why the hell cares or needs this?!
That said, I, as a nerd, who also runs Windows XP (holy mama of logical conflict!), usually leave my PC on all the time, so I can defragment, index, and download crap every night.
I don't reboot for weeks and months at a time, because I'm a damn nerd. So what, should I fucking call CNN now and tell them about my uptime?
Also do you realize that all those huge sites based on
That's a very good question, and in spite of all the theories people will throw around, I'm not sure Microsoft even knows the answer.
Microsoft has survived so far because it knows the answer, however.
Software gets obsolete very VERY fast. Microsoft tries to anticipate the needs and lacks of Windows, and build them into their next version as soon as possible, this ensures their long-term success.
What would happen if they didn't? People would use XP for some years to come, but as competing solutions that seemed marginal (Linux, OSX) improve, their benefits will become more apparent and lucrative. People would consider switching from Windows, when at some point, the benefits of compatibility fall below the harm done by the fact that Windows has become terribly out of date.
It's really odd, you know. A software that was the best among its peers, considered secure, bug free, stable, fast... if left stale for some time, starts looking real bad in all those categories. Do you want an actual example?
Internet Explorer. Some Slashdot posters with shorter memory may have forgotten, but IE was ages ahead on all those accounts compared to Netscape 4. But leave IE stale for 5-6 years.. and people started switching to Firefox.
This is what awaits Windows (of course it'll be a much slower process), if Microsoft doesn't get their act on Windows releases (such as Vista).
I think you're wrong here: as hateful as XP was, it was a relief compared to such gems as Windows 98 or ME
Have you tried Windows 98 recently? You'll be surprised how snappy it is on a Celeron 300MHz, much faster than XP on 3GHz machine.
I remember people boo-ed at XP's system requirements for a long time when it came out. It was Vista all over again. Learn from your past, and best of all, don't forget it.
Windows 98 was a nice OS for its time, XP was a nice OS for its time, and Vista may be a nice OS for it's (still coming up) time. They were all hated when introduced because: a) it's a change, people hate change b) software needs time to catch up c) hardware needs time to catch up d) microsoft needs to do some patching to get the initial flaws out
Yes, statistical significance is attainable but only if the sample is representative (i.e.) is random.
Actually "random" would be the opposite of "representative", as long as statistics are concerned. Represenative means the same proportions of the subgroups in the samples are the same as the whole. The subgroups should be carefully chosen to represent properly what could bias or change the outcome of the results.
As an extremely simple example, you want in the sample to have the same proportions of age, gender, income, professions etc (some of those categories may not matter in certain studies).
Is the lack of good font control. Lack of kerning is one thing.
Kerning is a domain of the font definition, not CSS. Don't be stupid: would you really supply endless number of kenring pairs in your CSS for every page you do, if CSS had that?
Do you have any idea how much time it takes to create a properly kerned font? More time than it might take you to do your site.
The whole article on Wired is pointless, and wrong. Most new fonts shipped today, and the default fonts shipped with Mac and Windows, have and make use of, kerning information.
I'm happy, however, that Wired discovered something that's mainstream on computers for quite some years now.
Point re: the java applets was that they are still ubiquitous,
Last time I saw a Java applet (and I browse the net a lot, it's kinda an aspect of my job) was two years ago on some dubious casino game site.
And it wouldn't run since of course I didn't have the JRE plugin enabled. They were in the process of converting their site to flash which was noted in an excuse note in the page footer.
Last time I saw Flash was 1 min ago.
...I use an XHTML mime-type on all my pages.
Don't forget to add some SVG while you're at it. There's little to lose (Opera/Safari/Firefox all support a subset of SVG).
Never mind IE, the idiots I'd like to kick the shit out of are the ones who do a website entirely in Flash!
Full Flash sites are animated game, movie sites, which really have an interactive experience and series of photos/trailers to offer, more than any information.
But never mind Flash sites, the idiots I'd like to kick the shit out of are the ones who think site owners owe them something for going to their site. If you don't like it, don't browse it, I like artsy interactive sites just fine.
Movielink is forcing me to immigrate in USA:
Thanks for your interest in Movielink, the leading movie download service. Sorry, but Movielink is presently unavailable to users outside of the United States.
If you are a current customer of Movielink and believe you have reached this page in error, please access Live Chat with Customer Service under Help in your Movielink Manager.
Your IP address is --.--.--.--
And what's with the "Your IP address is"? Is the message "we got our eye on you, terrorist!" or what? Am I supposed to feel guilty I'm outside USA?
Or maybe they're just friendly and want me to make sure I know what my IP is.
I find it amusing you are complaining about the size of the JVM given until recently many people were routinely spawning an applet per hover button (yes, stupid people). Still was treated as completely normal
/opt/netscape/plugins/libflashplayer.so /opt/netscape/plugins/libflashplayer.so.
Excuse me but why exactly do we take as a reference what do stupid people consider for "normal"?
Oh, and:
$ ls -lh
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6.8M 2007-01-19 14:21
Not sure where you are getting the 1M runtime from.
You're really good you know that? The Windows runtime is 1MB. Which is what most people use, since surprisingly that's the dominant desktop OS (and most of the Linux installations are servers, which surpisingly don't need Flash).
The reason Mac OS Flash is bigger (2-3 MB) is because it's a MacTel version, and for similar reasons the Linux version is biggest, since it has to run on a bunch of distros, with a bunch of media subsystems and a bunch of sound subsystems, I really don't wish multimedia app implementation for Linux to be given to even my worst enemy.
Ok, to sum it up: it's normal to use Java applets for rollover buttons, using Flash over Java is "handicapping" yourself (what exactly so crucial for a web app is Flash missing?), and let's take Linux as the desktop OS for reference, since it's the most spread one. I feel smarter.
Surely you cannot say there is no doubt to the existence of solely 3 dimensions? For one, how would you explain the instantaneous communicative nature of spinning quantum particles?
You assume two particles should touch each other or somehow share a space or dimension, to communicate.
Given we've most likely only uncovered a fraction of what the universe works like, what if the apparent model of the universe is "run" in another model that ties it all together.
As a blatantly simplified example: how does a computer game hero understand what's outside the computer?
Few conclusions follow:
- it may be impossible to ever understand how the universe works, since we're inside it (doesn't mean we should EVER stop trying)
- it's not up to dimensions. You may add hundreds of dimensions and you again can't approximate the "hidden model".