You cannot put inkjet photo paper into a laser printer. The coatings on the inkjet photo papers (generally glossy) may come off on the heated rollers of the laser printer and make a huge mess inside the laser. You should never use specialty/premium inkjet papers in a laser unless the manufacturer states that it is laser compatible.
The coatings of the inkjet papers are designed to absorb the carrier/solvents quickly without spreading so the ink dots don't spread out, and dry quickly to leave the pigment on the surface (or dye). Heat and pressure from a laser may cause that layer to delaminate and wind up on the rollers.
You cannot compare laser printing with higher end inkjets because the laser generally uses a CMYK (cyan, magenta, yellow and black) toner process while the the latest inkjets have 7+ inks in them. This means the gamut (colour range) is larger and/or the gradations in between the tones is much smoother.
Good photo quality inkjets usually have a light cyan and light magenta and maybe even a grey ink to provide smooth transitions so things like skin tones can be very smooth. This also allows the the cyan and magenta carts to be more vibrant than a 4 colour CMYK process.
Other inkjet models may have a CMYK +RG to increase gamut as well. The RG stands for Red and Green.
Most laser printers are on a 600/1200 dpi resolution setting as well, while inkjets are in the range of 720/1440/2880, making fine details and gradations show up better on the inkjet.
Use colour laser for everything but small photos and premium photos. Those should be done on inkjets. For most people, the cheapest inkjet prints should be sent to costco or your local printer.
The model of ink jet printers and ink cartridges being like the razor and razor blade model has been established for decades now. The biggest issue with the pricing of the ink is in the advancement of the technology as well as the replacement cycles.
Once you slow down the replacement cycle the R&D overhead with the new models will become less of an issue, and prices of cartridges will start to fall.
However, no one ever said that you had to buy into the manufacturer's game. If you don't like HP's inkjet prices, then don't buy it. No one put a gun to your head, and if you didn't do your research to profile which printer cost you the least over time for your printing needs, the only person you have to blame is yourself.
FWIW, the technology behind inkjet printers has advanced substantially over the years. Just because you may not appreciate it, others might and do.
The resolution of inkjets has gotten markedly higher, the droplet size smaller, placement more precise, less clogging. Along with the switch to pigmented (versus dye) ink, the permanence has gone up radically (beyond silver halide) and the gamut even larger.
A good indication of where the consumer inkjets are going is from the higher end photo printing market. A decent comparison of the latest inkjets can be found here: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/x300.shtml
That comparison is of the 24" and 44" roll fed models from Canon, HP and Epson. Note the gamut increase from one generation and the competition's. If you don't think the formulation of the ink has changed to get the vibrance of a pigmented ink suspension versus a dye ink, you should really do some research before flaming a guy who had purported to spend some time with the HP engineers.
Are inkjet cartridges premium priced? You betcha. Are HP inkjets carts out of line with the competition? I doubt it.
Just remember the HP formulation may not be the same as another manufacturer's since they have different methods of laying down the ink. As well, HP has cheap user replaceable heads while some manufacturers like Epson, do not. The cost of the head is figured into the price, of course.
As well, HP's profits are definitely anchored by the printing division, but if the numbers were so far out of line with the other printer manufacturers, they'd be doing something wrong. And if all printer manufacturers were so greedy as to be ripping everyone off, you'd have a huge amount of competitors flooding into the market to try to grab their share of the fat profits available. Chinese printers, anyone?
The ugly truth of the matter is that the consumer end of the inkjet market sucks because anyone who prints a lot will get screwed. The corollary is that if you print a lot, don't buy a consumer ink jet. Or refill your own using the manufacturer's bulk sizes. For instance, the ink formulations for a B8850/B9180 are the same as the Z2100 series, which are 70mL carts. Buying one of those and refilling the tiny (15mL) B series works great.
The party responsible for Germany's defeat is Hitler. His failure to land troops in Britain and to start a (two front) war with the Soviets was what did him in in the end. Good fortune for the rest of the world.
If the Allies could not have a staging area so close in Britain, and there was no Eastern front, the Germans could have taken all of Africa.
Not every printer is a consumer printer. Large format printers can get files gigabytes in size being thrown at them. There's lots of higher end applications that need lots of data, fast.
The problem with the idea of smaller government is that the elected officials start believing that getting elected is all there is to doing their job as government, ie. there is no need for expertise within that field. Look at FEMA and New Orleans.
There is a current level of snobbery within elected officials looking at the administrators of government, aka bureaucracy. The problem with the bureaucracy is that it is opaque to all the outsiders (and maybe the insiders as well), so all the elected officials start by downsizing and firing the administrators. The elected officials certainly aren't going to fire themselves.
Of course, the elected officials figured out that they don't want to take the fall for decreased services so they simply cut the budgets of the departments and make the administrators take the fall for it. This is also known as "starving the beast."
Too bad that the only people who are competent at surviving such purges are the self-interested (ie. do nothing) staff. The competent hard-working people were the ones too busy to play office politics and are the ones who get laid off. The lucky competents get burdened with all the remaining work and either go postal or burn out. There is a minimum size to an effective bureaucracy and while the theory that everyone can work 'smarter' is great in principle, the reality is that you need a decent amount of smart, hard-working people to get something technical/difficult done.
FWIW, I know engineers from competing car companies who have analyzed Toyota's cars. They clinic/disassemble them frequently enough to see some of the shenanigans that Toyota has pulled. Nothing was avoided because they all have a code of silence amongst them. Just because you know Toyota is pulling some shit doesn't mean you go running to the public about it. Because Toyota will do the same to you. Government has nothing to do with it.
What is wrong is that everyone started believing the mantra that smaller government is better government. This isn't just limited to the United States.
In Canada, the province where I live (Alberta), derives a major part of its revenues from oil and gas. In the same conservative government 35 years ago, we had 2 independent arms of the government who could determine how much royalties were owed to the government from the oil and gas producers.
Today, we have no one in our government who is able to determine how much we should be collecting and therefore have to rely upon the oil and gas companies to tell use how much they are supposed to remit. Our own government auditor believes we have been bilked out of billions yet somehow we have a leaner and, ahem, more efficient government.
Just remember that the only thing to stand up to a big business nowadays is big government, and the goal of any big business is to convince everyone that a small government can watch over big business just like a big government can.
"...Google Chrome must support plug-ins such as Flash Player and Silverlight so users can visit popular Web sites such as YouTube. These plug-ins are not designed to run in a sandbox, however, and they expect direct access to the underlying operating system. This allows them to implement features such as full-screen video chat with access to the entire screen, the user's webcam, and microphone. Google Chrome does not currently run these plug-ins in a sandbox, instead relying on their respective vendors to maintain their own security."
I'd imagine that since Chrome doesn't sandbox, the other browsers would have a hard time sandboxing those plugins as well.
1. *someone* was apparently hacking into Hanni's account.
2. Foreman works for Metron.
3. Foreman exchanges emails with Hanni.
4. Senior VP of Metron calls Foreman into office and shows apparent emails of Hanni and Foreman.
5. Hanni accuses Delta/Metron of being the hackers from point 1?
Kind of a leap to jump from point 4 to point 5. Metron's email policies may give up any reasonable privacy if Foreman used a Metron email account. Then again, the article is a bit light on details.
So what happens if/when iTunes sends a firmware update that bricks the Pre? If Palm is using forged IDs is it Apple's responsibility to ensure that it doesn't overwrite a 'hacked' device?
I'd mod you down for not even bothering to RTFA, but claiming that it didn't say what the calls were about is a bit disingenuous.
From the very first link: Several commenters on the store say theyâ€(TM)ve received phone calls from the company behind the application after they downloaded the free version, inviting them to shell out money for the full version.
Proper citation would go a long way to encourage where the news came from. Ripping someone off as a blog or as a commercial reporting organization denies the original contributor their due.
As a side effect, it would help to ascertain when someone is trying to push an issue by astroturfing.
Part of the issue now that we have the quantity of news being shoved down our throats is now judging the quality of the news that we are getting.
Resource usage, compatability, performance and security. Talking about 1 of the criteria without referring to any of the rest is like talking about trees falling in the forest. Especially when it's not compared with IEx as a reference point, since the earlier versions are still(!) the dominant browser for most of the population.
"Google Chrome must support plug-ins such as Flash Player and Silverlight so users can visit popular Web sites such as YouTube. These plug-ins are not designed to run in a sandbox, however, and they expect direct access to the underlying operating system. This allows them to implement features such as full-screen video chat with access to the entire screen, the userâ(TM)s webcam, and microphone. Google Chrome does not currently run these plug-ins in a sandbox, instead relying on their respective vendors to maintain their own security."
6-8 hours on Rikti Doll/Meows are actually not as big an exploit as the guy who leveled to 50 in 90 minutes using a bigger exploit. Those are the guys who really got the devs PO'd.
Since no one has placed what 'owned' means, here's the rules from the canwest site:
2009-03-18-01:00:00 PWN2OWN Final Rules
Well after much discussion and deliberation here is the final cut at scenarios for the PWN2OWN competitions.
Browsers and Associated Test PAltform
Vaio - Windows 7
* IE8
* Firefox
* Chrome
Macintosh
* Safari
* Firefox
Day 1: Default install no additional plugins. User goes to link. Day 2: flash, java,.net, quicktime. User goes to link. Day 3: popular apps such as acrobat reader... User goes to link
What is owned? - code execution within context of application
=====
I'm presuming that code execution is the first step towards owning the whole box, which may or may not be trivial once you got code execution happening within the app.
For instance, I can buy a painting from a painter. He may say, "under no circumstances are you to destroy this paining or sell it to anyone else," but once he sells it to me, I can do with it as I please. I can spray paint it, burn it, or sell it.
This is the crux of the matter. In face-to-face transactions, the painter would simply deny the sale to you of his painting if you refused his covenants. However in the new world of shrink wrap and electronic transfers, the requirement is to provide a End User License Agreement (EULA) for those covenants. The standard is that if you click 'I Agree', or bust open the shrink wrap, that you agree to the terms and conditions placed upon you for that product.
Obviously, the problem lies in when you do not agree or conform to the EULA. Is it enforceable? Is it valid? What are the penalties? Can you properly 'own' the product if you did not agree to the EULA or intended to break the agreement?
Regardless of the fluff about antitrust and DRM or whatever anyone wants to float, the center of the question revolves around EULAs and enforceability of those 'contracts'.
So instead of having a virtually guaranteed death sentence, Steve has a one-in-four to one-in-two chance of dying within 5 years? Still not very good odds.
I think the problem is not just higher production costs, but that the games themselves cannot take advantage of having 3 or more GPUs. The diminishing returns of having more than 1 GPU fall off harshly after adding the 2nd GPU.
I think that if the GPUs delivered better scalability across multiple units you would see higher end setups. I believe this is a software issue, so if 3 GPUs don't yield much increase in performance people won't bother. It's the old adage of software driving the hardware, and not vice versa.
FWIW, I have dual Dell 3007s with an 8800GTX attached to it. The main reason I got the GPU was for my main game, City of Heroes. It sort of chugs along between 20-40 fps with all eye candy on, and if the GTX280 delivered a lot more performance I would have upgraded to that too. As it stands, City of Heroes does not benefit from a second GPU so adding another 8800GTX does nothing for me. Otherwise I would have done that in a heartbeat if I could double my performance. Unfortunately NCSoft doesn't make City of Heroes very compatible with all the eye candy for ATi cards or I'd have gone 4870x2.
Now that I'm playing Left 4 Dead as well, I might get an improved setup since the game is not very playable at 2560x1600 with the 8800GTX solo. I turn it down to 1920x1200 non anti-aliased to get 40-50 fps. I'll probably holding out for a GTX295 with dual GPUs on a single card since my motherboard only does AMD/ATI crossfire and not nVidia SLI, or maybe the next generation single GPU setup.
This is on a Core2 quad running at 3 GHz and 8GB RAM, which isn't too far off the mark of what HP's CTO is complaining is a 'tough or impossible sell'. If the performance of a triple GPU monster actually gave a decent return on performance over a single or dual GPU setup, I believe a decent set of gamers would buy it.
However, most people who are into the top tier of gaming performance also have their own preferences to any gear, and wouldn't pick a whole system from a single vendor, especially HP. I think that segment of the market likes to tweak and build their own boxes in order to get the biggest bang for the buck.
Heh, glad to see slashdot readers marking this as insightful.
FTFA: "[EAL6+] is the highest [rating] in the world. This means that the OS was designed and certified to defend against well-funded and sophisticated attackers," says David Chandler, CEO of Integrity Global Security, the new Green Hills subsidiary.
Parent should be marked as funny, even if they didn't see the humour carefully woven into the OP.
Slashdot Mirror
You cannot put inkjet photo paper into a laser printer. The coatings on the inkjet photo papers (generally glossy) may come off on the heated rollers of the laser printer and make a huge mess inside the laser. You should never use specialty/premium inkjet papers in a laser unless the manufacturer states that it is laser compatible.
The coatings of the inkjet papers are designed to absorb the carrier/solvents quickly without spreading so the ink dots don't spread out, and dry quickly to leave the pigment on the surface (or dye). Heat and pressure from a laser may cause that layer to delaminate and wind up on the rollers.
You cannot compare laser printing with higher end inkjets because the laser generally uses a CMYK (cyan, magenta, yellow and black) toner process while the the latest inkjets have 7+ inks in them. This means the gamut (colour range) is larger and/or the gradations in between the tones is much smoother.
Good photo quality inkjets usually have a light cyan and light magenta and maybe even a grey ink to provide smooth transitions so things like skin tones can be very smooth. This also allows the the cyan and magenta carts to be more vibrant than a 4 colour CMYK process.
Other inkjet models may have a CMYK +RG to increase gamut as well. The RG stands for Red and Green.
Most laser printers are on a 600/1200 dpi resolution setting as well, while inkjets are in the range of 720/1440/2880, making fine details and gradations show up better on the inkjet.
Use colour laser for everything but small photos and premium photos. Those should be done on inkjets. For most people, the cheapest inkjet prints should be sent to costco or your local printer.
Perhaps you need a course in anger management.
The model of ink jet printers and ink cartridges being like the razor and razor blade model has been established for decades now. The biggest issue with the pricing of the ink is in the advancement of the technology as well as the replacement cycles.
Once you slow down the replacement cycle the R&D overhead with the new models will become less of an issue, and prices of cartridges will start to fall.
However, no one ever said that you had to buy into the manufacturer's game. If you don't like HP's inkjet prices, then don't buy it. No one put a gun to your head, and if you didn't do your research to profile which printer cost you the least over time for your printing needs, the only person you have to blame is yourself.
FWIW, the technology behind inkjet printers has advanced substantially over the years. Just because you may not appreciate it, others might and do.
The resolution of inkjets has gotten markedly higher, the droplet size smaller, placement more precise, less clogging. Along with the switch to pigmented (versus dye) ink, the permanence has gone up radically (beyond silver halide) and the gamut even larger.
A good indication of where the consumer inkjets are going is from the higher end photo printing market. A decent comparison of the latest inkjets can be found here:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/printers/x300.shtml
That comparison is of the 24" and 44" roll fed models from Canon, HP and Epson. Note the gamut increase from one generation and the competition's. If you don't think the formulation of the ink has changed to get the vibrance of a pigmented ink suspension versus a dye ink, you should really do some research before flaming a guy who had purported to spend some time with the HP engineers.
Are inkjet cartridges premium priced? You betcha. Are HP inkjets carts out of line with the competition? I doubt it.
Just remember the HP formulation may not be the same as another manufacturer's since they have different methods of laying down the ink. As well, HP has cheap user replaceable heads while some manufacturers like Epson, do not. The cost of the head is figured into the price, of course.
As well, HP's profits are definitely anchored by the printing division, but if the numbers were so far out of line with the other printer manufacturers, they'd be doing something wrong. And if all printer manufacturers were so greedy as to be ripping everyone off, you'd have a huge amount of competitors flooding into the market to try to grab their share of the fat profits available. Chinese printers, anyone?
The ugly truth of the matter is that the consumer end of the inkjet market sucks because anyone who prints a lot will get screwed. The corollary is that if you print a lot, don't buy a consumer ink jet. Or refill your own using the manufacturer's bulk sizes. For instance, the ink formulations for a B8850/B9180 are the same as the Z2100 series, which are 70mL carts. Buying one of those and refilling the tiny (15mL) B series works great.
The party responsible for Germany's defeat is Hitler. His failure to land troops in Britain and to start a (two front) war with the Soviets was what did him in in the end. Good fortune for the rest of the world.
If the Allies could not have a staging area so close in Britain, and there was no Eastern front, the Germans could have taken all of Africa.
Not every printer is a consumer printer. Large format printers can get files gigabytes in size being thrown at them. There's lots of higher end applications that need lots of data, fast.
The problem with the idea of smaller government is that the elected officials start believing that getting elected is all there is to doing their job as government, ie. there is no need for expertise within that field. Look at FEMA and New Orleans.
There is a current level of snobbery within elected officials looking at the administrators of government, aka bureaucracy. The problem with the bureaucracy is that it is opaque to all the outsiders (and maybe the insiders as well), so all the elected officials start by downsizing and firing the administrators. The elected officials certainly aren't going to fire themselves.
Of course, the elected officials figured out that they don't want to take the fall for decreased services so they simply cut the budgets of the departments and make the administrators take the fall for it. This is also known as "starving the beast."
Too bad that the only people who are competent at surviving such purges are the self-interested (ie. do nothing) staff. The competent hard-working people were the ones too busy to play office politics and are the ones who get laid off. The lucky competents get burdened with all the remaining work and either go postal or burn out. There is a minimum size to an effective bureaucracy and while the theory that everyone can work 'smarter' is great in principle, the reality is that you need a decent amount of smart, hard-working people to get something technical/difficult done.
FWIW, I know engineers from competing car companies who have analyzed Toyota's cars. They clinic/disassemble them frequently enough to see some of the shenanigans that Toyota has pulled. Nothing was avoided because they all have a code of silence amongst them. Just because you know Toyota is pulling some shit doesn't mean you go running to the public about it. Because Toyota will do the same to you. Government has nothing to do with it.
What is wrong is that everyone started believing the mantra that smaller government is better government. This isn't just limited to the United States.
In Canada, the province where I live (Alberta), derives a major part of its revenues from oil and gas. In the same conservative government 35 years ago, we had 2 independent arms of the government who could determine how much royalties were owed to the government from the oil and gas producers.
Today, we have no one in our government who is able to determine how much we should be collecting and therefore have to rely upon the oil and gas companies to tell use how much they are supposed to remit. Our own government auditor believes we have been bilked out of billions yet somehow we have a leaner and, ahem, more efficient government.
Just remember that the only thing to stand up to a big business nowadays is big government, and the goal of any big business is to convince everyone that a small government can watch over big business just like a big government can.
http://queue.acm.org/detail.cfm?id=1556050
"...Google Chrome must support plug-ins such as Flash Player and Silverlight so users can visit popular Web sites such as YouTube. These plug-ins are not designed to run in a sandbox, however, and they expect direct access to the underlying operating system. This allows them to implement features such as full-screen video chat with access to the entire screen, the user's webcam, and microphone. Google Chrome does not currently run these plug-ins in a sandbox, instead relying on their respective vendors to maintain their own security."
I'd imagine that since Chrome doesn't sandbox, the other browsers would have a hard time sandboxing those plugins as well.
I don't see a smoking gun either.
From the article,
1. *someone* was apparently hacking into Hanni's account.
2. Foreman works for Metron.
3. Foreman exchanges emails with Hanni.
4. Senior VP of Metron calls Foreman into office and shows apparent emails of Hanni and Foreman.
5. Hanni accuses Delta/Metron of being the hackers from point 1?
Kind of a leap to jump from point 4 to point 5. Metron's email policies may give up any reasonable privacy if Foreman used a Metron email account. Then again, the article is a bit light on details.
So what happens if/when iTunes sends a firmware update that bricks the Pre? If Palm is using forged IDs is it Apple's responsibility to ensure that it doesn't overwrite a 'hacked' device?
meh. of course the garbage in the post doesn't show up when you hit preview.../. please fix.
I'd mod you down for not even bothering to RTFA, but claiming that it didn't say what the calls were about is a bit disingenuous.
From the very first link:
Several commenters on the store say theyâ€(TM)ve received phone calls from the company behind the application after they downloaded the free version, inviting them to shell out money for the full version.
The should use orange goo.
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/08/31/0627236/The-Orange-Goo-That-Could-Save-Your-Laptop?art_pos=1
The UK based North Koreans of course.
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/manga-porn/
Proper citation would go a long way to encourage where the news came from. Ripping someone off as a blog or as a commercial reporting organization denies the original contributor their due.
As a side effect, it would help to ascertain when someone is trying to push an issue by astroturfing.
Part of the issue now that we have the quantity of news being shoved down our throats is now judging the quality of the news that we are getting.
Resource usage, compatability, performance and security. Talking about 1 of the criteria without referring to any of the rest is like talking about trees falling in the forest. Especially when it's not compared with IEx as a reference point, since the earlier versions are still(!) the dominant browser for most of the population.
And get into HTML5 for video etc:
"Google Chrome must support plug-ins such as Flash Player and Silverlight so users can visit popular Web sites such as YouTube. These plug-ins are not designed to run in a sandbox, however, and they expect direct access to the underlying operating system. This allows them to implement features such as full-screen video chat with access to the entire screen, the userâ(TM)s webcam, and microphone. Google Chrome does not currently run these plug-ins in a sandbox, instead relying on their respective vendors to maintain their own security."
6-8 hours on Rikti Doll/Meows are actually not as big an exploit as the guy who leveled to 50 in 90 minutes using a bigger exploit. Those are the guys who really got the devs PO'd.
Since no one has placed what 'owned' means, here's the rules from the canwest site:
2009-03-18-01:00:00 PWN2OWN Final Rules
Well after much discussion and deliberation here is the final cut at scenarios for the PWN2OWN competitions.
Browsers and Associated Test PAltform
Vaio - Windows 7
* IE8
* Firefox
* Chrome
Macintosh
* Safari
* Firefox
Day 1: Default install no additional plugins. User goes to link. .net, quicktime. User goes to link. ... User goes to link
Day 2: flash, java,
Day 3: popular apps such as acrobat reader
What is owned? - code execution within context of application
=====
I'm presuming that code execution is the first step towards owning the whole box, which may or may not be trivial once you got code execution happening within the app.
For instance, I can buy a painting from a painter. He may say, "under no circumstances are you to destroy this paining or sell it to anyone else," but once he sells it to me, I can do with it as I please. I can spray paint it, burn it, or sell it.
This is the crux of the matter. In face-to-face transactions, the painter would simply deny the sale to you of his painting if you refused his covenants. However in the new world of shrink wrap and electronic transfers, the requirement is to provide a End User License Agreement (EULA) for those covenants. The standard is that if you click 'I Agree', or bust open the shrink wrap, that you agree to the terms and conditions placed upon you for that product.
Obviously, the problem lies in when you do not agree or conform to the EULA. Is it enforceable? Is it valid? What are the penalties? Can you properly 'own' the product if you did not agree to the EULA or intended to break the agreement?
Regardless of the fluff about antitrust and DRM or whatever anyone wants to float, the center of the question revolves around EULAs and enforceability of those 'contracts'.
So instead of having a virtually guaranteed death sentence, Steve has a one-in-four to one-in-two chance of dying within 5 years? Still not very good odds.
I think the problem is not just higher production costs, but that the games themselves cannot take advantage of having 3 or more GPUs. The diminishing returns of having more than 1 GPU fall off harshly after adding the 2nd GPU.
I think that if the GPUs delivered better scalability across multiple units you would see higher end setups. I believe this is a software issue, so if 3 GPUs don't yield much increase in performance people won't bother. It's the old adage of software driving the hardware, and not vice versa.
FWIW, I have dual Dell 3007s with an 8800GTX attached to it. The main reason I got the GPU was for my main game, City of Heroes. It sort of chugs along between 20-40 fps with all eye candy on, and if the GTX280 delivered a lot more performance I would have upgraded to that too. As it stands, City of Heroes does not benefit from a second GPU so adding another 8800GTX does nothing for me. Otherwise I would have done that in a heartbeat if I could double my performance. Unfortunately NCSoft doesn't make City of Heroes very compatible with all the eye candy for ATi cards or I'd have gone 4870x2.
Now that I'm playing Left 4 Dead as well, I might get an improved setup since the game is not very playable at 2560x1600 with the 8800GTX solo. I turn it down to 1920x1200 non anti-aliased to get 40-50 fps. I'll probably holding out for a GTX295 with dual GPUs on a single card since my motherboard only does AMD/ATI crossfire and not nVidia SLI, or maybe the next generation single GPU setup.
This is on a Core2 quad running at 3 GHz and 8GB RAM, which isn't too far off the mark of what HP's CTO is complaining is a 'tough or impossible sell'. If the performance of a triple GPU monster actually gave a decent return on performance over a single or dual GPU setup, I believe a decent set of gamers would buy it.
However, most people who are into the top tier of gaming performance also have their own preferences to any gear, and wouldn't pick a whole system from a single vendor, especially HP. I think that segment of the market likes to tweak and build their own boxes in order to get the biggest bang for the buck.
Why is the parent post modded informative when the reply shows that this is obviously wrong?
Even the parent's response to the reply is modded up when it is wrong again.
Heh, glad to see slashdot readers marking this as insightful.
FTFA:
"[EAL6+] is the highest [rating] in the world. This means that the OS was designed and certified to defend against well-funded and sophisticated attackers," says David Chandler, CEO of Integrity Global Security, the new Green Hills subsidiary.
Parent should be marked as funny, even if they didn't see the humour carefully woven into the OP.
I read this story right after I finished reading this story from the New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/19/business/19ping.html
It's about Yahoo's changing of its home page and doing it gradually and and being very careful of responding to feedback.