WiFi isn't just for Internet, you know.
I have multiple computers in different rooms at my house.
My options were to drill holes, run, cut & crimp Cat6, buy some Gigabit switches, etc - or use WiFi.
I went with WiFi at first. 54 Mbps IS plenty for Internet.
But then I started copying games, ISOs/software, and multi-gig movies from one system to another. I started copying my movie library from my main system to a system by my TV.
Suddenly, it became PAINFULLY obvious that WiFi would NOT cut it.
Even when I tried to stream HD content from one system to another, it started to get choppy.
I ended up drilling holes, running cable, etc. 1,000 Mbps is a lot better. That is still the weakest link between the systems. I get 30-60 MB/s that way, when I know I could be transferring 70-110 MB/s with my hard drives.
If it was WiFi, a 2+ Gbps connection would be ideal. If it was stable, and it reached all rooms at my house (some are 2-3 rooms away from my current AP). Until I can get that, wired Gigabit is the way to go.
I went out and bought a PS3 and the Blu-ray version of Avatar.
I popped the disc in and watched it in beautiful 1920x1080p on a 55" HDTV with 120Hz Smooth Motion.
The picture was amazing, and I enjoyed the movie. I had already seen it twice in theaters, and seeing it at home in such amazing detail was just as entertaining.
The DRM issue means nothing to me. One of the deciding factors of getting a PS3 was its Blu-ray capability (something I actually didn't care about in the past). Plus the Blu-Ray package came with a "free" DVD copy of the movie that I can easily copy, rip, convert, and use any way I feel like.
What I do notice is the "Avatar sucks" bandwagon. It got great reviews, and people saw it again and again. It was wildly popular even without the 3D going for it. It looked amazing and was very entertaining.
8.4 on IMDB, 82% on RT (and 94% with "Top Critics"), plus the movie is getting close to the 3 BILLION mark. It obviously did not suck. It doesn't make you "cool" to say it sucks, it just makes you a minority.
The ability to play PlayStation 2 games without requiring me to have a totally other system hooked up as well was a big selling point of the PS3.
Having a "Blu-Ray" player that can't play all the HD-DVDs I want is *NOT* a selling point for me.
Having the un-wanted Blu-Ray player made the cost go way up. To battle this cost, Sony tripped up, shot itself in its foot over and over, and then decided the best thing to do was drop backwards compatibility - despite statements in the past stressing the price of the PS3 was fine, and that backwards compatibility was a GOOD thing.
"They" have been saying for 10 years now that Linux is ready for the Desktop.
It will be ready for the Desktop when the public says it is.
Not supporting DRM or getting scary "constitutes a CRIME" messages when trying to play music and movies doesn't help.
Pushing "OpenOffice" as a free *clone* of Microsoft Office doesn't seem to be fooling people either. It will only take a user 5 minutes to realize it lacks the Mail functionality or even comes close in speed of Microsoft's Office.
I am looking forward to Ubuntu 7.10. I still won't see it as a replacement for Windows - but it is definitely an alternative to it.
Linux for me has excelled as a great tool/utility OS and a server OS.
System requirements for OpenOffice are higher than some versions of Microsoft Office!
Everything from Office XP loads and runs very quick on my Pentium 1 w/ 96 Megs RAM.
In fact, performance of MS Office on that system is slightly better than my Athlon 64 3000+ w/ 2 Gigs RAM running OpenOffice 2.x.
OpenOffice takes longer to load up, uses more RAM when it is running, and simple things like resizing the window cause really slow re-draws of the program window.
Throw in the fact that the most commonly used Microsoft Office application I've seen used it *Outlook*, to which OpenOffice does not have it's own version of - makes OpenOffice not even a choice for many companies out there.
When OpenOffice's performance gets a major tune-up, and they add an Outlook clone, THEN people will see it as a real choice.
Maybe on my Pentium 1 computer do I care about browser speed.
Browser features is the major deciding factor for me.
Firefox simply is capable of doing more than any other browser.
It wouldn't matter if IE (which has barely ANY features) or Opera started up just by me blinking. I'd still gladly for Firefox.
Great. Better ATI drivers for Linux - but for their "NEWER" chipsets?
What about me with my 9800 and my friend with his 9600?
I've been waiting YEARS for some decent drivers.
Will these new drivers only be for their newest chipsets/cards?
ATI making newer drivers, but not making them for most of their cards is the same as them not making drivers at all for those who have unsupported cards.
Are you retarded? Do you not know what BitTorrent is even for?
How could the public fall for such a thing?? What?? BitTorrent is something the entire industry should be switching to.
Thunderbird's newsreader seems the same as it was ever since it was the Netscape newsreader.
hardly anything has changed.
it still displays "Lines" instead of "Size". it also can't join posts like Outlook Express is able to.
why has the newsreader been left unchanged for so long? it looks and works the same (crappy) as it always had. hardly anything has changed since the mid 1990s.
will there be five PlayStation 3s now?
20 Gig PS3 with and without PS2 hardware.
60 Gig PS3 with and without PS2 hardware.
80 Gig PS3 without PS2 hardware.
i don't know what it does in the background when you try to copy files. i just know that it sucks.
trying to copy a few megs of files doesn't need it to "Calculate" for several minutes.
when my hard drives can transfer 33-70 megs a second, why does it seem like 1 meg a second is the max in Vista? why does it need to spend MORE time Calculating the transfer than doing the actual transfer?
Free / open / alternative systems and routers may come out.
Companies, especially larger ones, will still gladly purchase "authentic Cisco" products. When they buy Cisco, it may cost a lot, it may even be a rip off - but its still an established product from and established company. There is plenty of documentation and support for the product.
ok, i know this doesnt make Browzar any less lame, but it can be modified to use the start page YOU want, and the search engine you want as well (to an extent).
as a proof of concept, im hosting a zip file with 2 versions of the Browzer Black EXE. both use Google as the search engine. one uses Google as its start page, and the other uses my site as its start page.
i have the file here (i may update the page at a later date with other stuff as well):
http://xenomorph.net/browzar/
i posted this one some other sites because of the Adware issue. it doesnt make the browser any more secure, but you at least get to use a better search engine.
Its a bit misleading saying Firefox/Mozilla is dropping "pre Win2k" support.
It would be more accurate to say it's dropping NT4/Win9x support, and going NT5+ only.
Windows 2000 was released late 1999/early 2000, and Windows Me was released later mid 2000. WinMe (and therefor parts of Win9x) is newer than Windows 2000.
Anyway, I don't know how this will affect people. I use Windows 98SE on some older systems. My mother uses Windows 98SE on her only system. (mostly Pentium MMX 233MHz w/ 96-256 Megs RAM). Using something like WinXP on those systems would be a joke, and even going with Win2k isnt good. They'd run a lot slower and lose all support for DOS. Win98SE runs perfectly stable on the systems we use, and all of our programs work.
I know we're not the only ones who use computers like those.
If Windows 98SE "just works" - why upgrade? Most of the software out there now runs on older computers and operating systems - at least on the Windows platform. That's one reason why Windows is still so popular. Backwards compatibility. It's a shame to see Firefox specifically drop support for an older OS.
Slashdot Mirror
WiFi isn't just for Internet, you know. I have multiple computers in different rooms at my house. My options were to drill holes, run, cut & crimp Cat6, buy some Gigabit switches, etc - or use WiFi. I went with WiFi at first. 54 Mbps IS plenty for Internet. But then I started copying games, ISOs/software, and multi-gig movies from one system to another. I started copying my movie library from my main system to a system by my TV. Suddenly, it became PAINFULLY obvious that WiFi would NOT cut it. Even when I tried to stream HD content from one system to another, it started to get choppy. I ended up drilling holes, running cable, etc. 1,000 Mbps is a lot better. That is still the weakest link between the systems. I get 30-60 MB/s that way, when I know I could be transferring 70-110 MB/s with my hard drives. If it was WiFi, a 2+ Gbps connection would be ideal. If it was stable, and it reached all rooms at my house (some are 2-3 rooms away from my current AP). Until I can get that, wired Gigabit is the way to go.
I went out and bought a PS3 and the Blu-ray version of Avatar. I popped the disc in and watched it in beautiful 1920x1080p on a 55" HDTV with 120Hz Smooth Motion. The picture was amazing, and I enjoyed the movie. I had already seen it twice in theaters, and seeing it at home in such amazing detail was just as entertaining. The DRM issue means nothing to me. One of the deciding factors of getting a PS3 was its Blu-ray capability (something I actually didn't care about in the past). Plus the Blu-Ray package came with a "free" DVD copy of the movie that I can easily copy, rip, convert, and use any way I feel like. What I do notice is the "Avatar sucks" bandwagon. It got great reviews, and people saw it again and again. It was wildly popular even without the 3D going for it. It looked amazing and was very entertaining. 8.4 on IMDB, 82% on RT (and 94% with "Top Critics"), plus the movie is getting close to the 3 BILLION mark. It obviously did not suck. It doesn't make you "cool" to say it sucks, it just makes you a minority.
JoyToKey! I was playing it with my PS2 controller last night.
The ability to play PlayStation 2 games without requiring me to have a totally other system hooked up as well was a big selling point of the PS3. Having a "Blu-Ray" player that can't play all the HD-DVDs I want is *NOT* a selling point for me. Having the un-wanted Blu-Ray player made the cost go way up. To battle this cost, Sony tripped up, shot itself in its foot over and over, and then decided the best thing to do was drop backwards compatibility - despite statements in the past stressing the price of the PS3 was fine, and that backwards compatibility was a GOOD thing.
"They" have been saying for 10 years now that Linux is ready for the Desktop. It will be ready for the Desktop when the public says it is. Not supporting DRM or getting scary "constitutes a CRIME" messages when trying to play music and movies doesn't help. Pushing "OpenOffice" as a free *clone* of Microsoft Office doesn't seem to be fooling people either. It will only take a user 5 minutes to realize it lacks the Mail functionality or even comes close in speed of Microsoft's Office. I am looking forward to Ubuntu 7.10. I still won't see it as a replacement for Windows - but it is definitely an alternative to it. Linux for me has excelled as a great tool/utility OS and a server OS.
System requirements for OpenOffice are higher than some versions of Microsoft Office! Everything from Office XP loads and runs very quick on my Pentium 1 w/ 96 Megs RAM. In fact, performance of MS Office on that system is slightly better than my Athlon 64 3000+ w/ 2 Gigs RAM running OpenOffice 2.x. OpenOffice takes longer to load up, uses more RAM when it is running, and simple things like resizing the window cause really slow re-draws of the program window. Throw in the fact that the most commonly used Microsoft Office application I've seen used it *Outlook*, to which OpenOffice does not have it's own version of - makes OpenOffice not even a choice for many companies out there. When OpenOffice's performance gets a major tune-up, and they add an Outlook clone, THEN people will see it as a real choice.
Maybe on my Pentium 1 computer do I care about browser speed. Browser features is the major deciding factor for me. Firefox simply is capable of doing more than any other browser. It wouldn't matter if IE (which has barely ANY features) or Opera started up just by me blinking. I'd still gladly for Firefox.
Great. Better ATI drivers for Linux - but for their "NEWER" chipsets? What about me with my 9800 and my friend with his 9600? I've been waiting YEARS for some decent drivers. Will these new drivers only be for their newest chipsets/cards? ATI making newer drivers, but not making them for most of their cards is the same as them not making drivers at all for those who have unsupported cards.
It's good to know Slashdot allows content like this when someone clicks on a story.
Are you retarded? Do you not know what BitTorrent is even for? How could the public fall for such a thing?? What?? BitTorrent is something the entire industry should be switching to.
didn't the PlayStation 1 receive a 33% price drop just 9 months after launch?
Thunderbird's newsreader seems the same as it was ever since it was the Netscape newsreader.
hardly anything has changed.
it still displays "Lines" instead of "Size". it also can't join posts like Outlook Express is able to.
why has the newsreader been left unchanged for so long? it looks and works the same (crappy) as it always had. hardly anything has changed since the mid 1990s.
will there be five PlayStation 3s now? 20 Gig PS3 with and without PS2 hardware. 60 Gig PS3 with and without PS2 hardware. 80 Gig PS3 without PS2 hardware.
i don't know what it does in the background when you try to copy files. i just know that it sucks. trying to copy a few megs of files doesn't need it to "Calculate" for several minutes. when my hard drives can transfer 33-70 megs a second, why does it seem like 1 meg a second is the max in Vista? why does it need to spend MORE time Calculating the transfer than doing the actual transfer?
Free / open / alternative systems and routers may come out. Companies, especially larger ones, will still gladly purchase "authentic Cisco" products. When they buy Cisco, it may cost a lot, it may even be a rip off - but its still an established product from and established company. There is plenty of documentation and support for the product.
ok, i know this doesnt make Browzar any less lame, but it can be modified to use the start page YOU want, and the search engine you want as well (to an extent). as a proof of concept, im hosting a zip file with 2 versions of the Browzer Black EXE. both use Google as the search engine. one uses Google as its start page, and the other uses my site as its start page. i have the file here (i may update the page at a later date with other stuff as well): http://xenomorph.net/browzar/ i posted this one some other sites because of the Adware issue. it doesnt make the browser any more secure, but you at least get to use a better search engine.
Its a bit misleading saying Firefox/Mozilla is dropping "pre Win2k" support. It would be more accurate to say it's dropping NT4/Win9x support, and going NT5+ only. Windows 2000 was released late 1999/early 2000, and Windows Me was released later mid 2000. WinMe (and therefor parts of Win9x) is newer than Windows 2000. Anyway, I don't know how this will affect people. I use Windows 98SE on some older systems. My mother uses Windows 98SE on her only system. (mostly Pentium MMX 233MHz w/ 96-256 Megs RAM). Using something like WinXP on those systems would be a joke, and even going with Win2k isnt good. They'd run a lot slower and lose all support for DOS. Win98SE runs perfectly stable on the systems we use, and all of our programs work. I know we're not the only ones who use computers like those. If Windows 98SE "just works" - why upgrade? Most of the software out there now runs on older computers and operating systems - at least on the Windows platform. That's one reason why Windows is still so popular. Backwards compatibility. It's a shame to see Firefox specifically drop support for an older OS.