I peered through the paper, and I don't exactly see how throttling the processor to very low speeds (lower than Speedstep) when idle solves less than optimizing CPU clock speed based on user activity. When properly configured, the speed "bursts" are as short as the burst is needed (i.e. when loading a program, or when compiling), and multiple step levels ensure that the CPU isn't going from minimum to maximum instantaneously (though this behavior can be configured).
Unfortunately, several thousand iPhone owners would probably disagree with your ideology. Most people use their cell phones as tools too, except not in the same light as you use yours. To some, having a cameraphone or gaming capability is of utmost importance; that doesn't make them any more of an immature customer.
I owned an iPhone for a while, and while I was mostly pleased with it, I found it to be very premature as a smart-phone. It met the general requirements for everything except internet browsing, where it exceeded them in spades, but only barely. If iPhone 3.0 changes that, then I might go back. I am, however, getting more interested in the Android platform.
For those that have used an iPhone previously, what differences should I keep in mind while making the transition? Does the G1 play music as good as the iPhone/iPod Touch does? How is its e-mail client? How does internet browsing compare?
I posed this very same question to a group of tech entrepreneurs in a list that I'm subscribed to. A lot of them see immense value in Twitter because of the speed in which things "click" on it. If you're "followed" enough, you can literally create one tag and have a massive following on the Internet playing along with it in a matter of minutes, largely because a lot of people use the service through their phones.
It's also a very effective marketing tool, as Oprah and Ellen DeGeneres have shown. In addition, it gives people who are totally un-tech-savvy a super simple outlet to pushing their ideas, which a lot of marketing folk fit nicely in (no offense to the sales people that are savvy).
A lot of people also find it a useful journalistic tool. The low-flying plane incident that happened in New York recently is a great example of Twitter's broadcasting power, since several thousand Twitter users wrote about it within minutes of it happening and almost certainly before the news outlets could get to it. The speed at which information spreads on there is fascinating, though the amount of crap that spreads follows the trend. It's kind of expected, though, when you mix well-informed people having fun with Twitter with those that lack even a slithering of character...
Again, I use it mostly for fun, but it's effectiveness almost wholly depends on those that you're connected to. In a matter of days, I found out about lots of specials and niceties that I would have been left out on without Twitter. Not saying that it's the best source for that, but it's pretty good. Wouldn't surprise me if it was a one-hit wonder, though.
Because apparently a lot of tech entrepreneurs and VCs see a fortitude for possibility in Twitter. I use it for fun, but its value really depends on whom you connect with.
I don't use the lingo, though. Twittering, tweeting, tweetup, etc et al. all sound about as vapid as "Googling" something. It's like ordering a "Grande" at Starbucks; sounds just as dumb as it is.
I have used a Windows XP machine on 256 MB RAM with an older Pentium IV processor, and it ran fine for everyday things. Moving the swap to another drive/empty partition helps.
If it's just Moz Firefox and Microsoft Office, it'll run great.
Actually, the ISA slots can be an incredible help in troubleshooting issues when PCI/PCIe/Integrated Video/AGP do not work. I think that one way to tell if there was a hardware issue before was to plug an ISA video card and check.
Question: does Verizon even have a forum for business customers? When my parent's business was under a business plan with Verizon, the support was stellar and we never got an "uneducated" representative.
Having been a "participant" in this kind of service (Computing.net, for instance, has adapted this service model for several years already), it can definitely be an effective solution for companies that need to face individual paying customers. However, I think that there are a few caveats to consider:
Corporations that need internal customer support would have a difficult time securing volunteers to learn their systems, work a certain shift and perform the same level of work.
As a volunteer, you make your own hours and don't need to meet a quota.
Additionally, as an online volunteer, he or she will not assume responsibility should a customer follow misinformation and mess something up.
If the medium for support is a forum or some similar community, the potential for distributing misinformation is much higher than a dedicated and paid support staff.
In short, I think that there will always be a market for dedicated, paid support teams, especially for internal support scenarios.
Actually, fructose and glucose are similar, except that fructose is a simple sugar and metabolizes directly to the liver (source), whereas everything metabolizes glucose. Fructose is good for controlling hunger, though. A lot of the negative effects of it come from ingesting over the recommended minimum (50 mg/day).
I actually read up a while ago that the minimum amount of regular exercise required is 30 minutes (read here). I can understand how doing short, but quick bursts of intense exercise works, since that would catalyze the burning of lactic acid described above. However, I really don't think doing quick sprints like that is a good idea because most people might get the idea that a 3-minute stretch or so is good enough to start doing shock exercise like that, when from my experience, it can lead to cramping and other muscular problems.
Personally, what works for me is having a healthy diet (which does include two cups of GOOD coffee), commuting to work by bike, doing long, endurance-pace rides on weekends and some calisthenics at home to keep the upper body muscles reasonably strong.
Thanks for this advice. I have had trouble sleeping for a few nights, and I think it has to do with the second cup of coffee I take in before bedtime. I'll definitely keep this in mind.
When you're not paid overtime, or when you hate your job, I think working the bare minimum is much more attractive. There was one job where I could have made a significant return on overtime, but I didn't like the line of work, so nothing could make want to stay there past my end time.
Fortunately, as a student, I still have options before I have to start looking for a job to actually survive on it.
I am very passionate about cycling, and tried racing, but didn't like it. However, niche sports like these all suffer from the same problem:
They don't have a mass audience.
There are millions of people that will watch a game of football, baseball, basketball or soccer (especially soccer) on a (n>inf)" widescreen plasma LCD TV (or any TV, really) at home, or in the pub/bar, supermarket, while shopping, etc. I postulate that a reason for this is that the action and "spirit" of each sport caters to different, but sufficiently large, populations. Those that like lots of back and forth action watch basketball, and those that like a bit of brutality in that action watch football or hockey. (Yes, I'm generalizing here.) Those that like calculated behaviors, but sparse explosions of action, watch something like baseball. Etc. ad nauseum. Additionally, there is nothing that can replace these sports. They are popular and irreplaceable, hence they garner a large market.
Sports like cycling, on the other hand, have very little action except for possibly the end. Has anyone ever actually watched a professional bike race? They are LONG, and riders spend most of that time collaborating tactically with each other to reach and sprint for the finish. They HELP each other throughout the race; where's the competition? Unless you are a real enthusiast, you can't watch a bike race in a bar, or anywhere fun. At least for me, it's hard to even watch it at home, and I love cycling. Top that with the ridiculous amount of doping incidents (that do make the press, since ESPN cares to write about THAT than actually broadcast races), and you have yourself a mass loser.
Gaming suffers the same fate. Only gamers would want to watch gamers play. There are outliers, but they are just that. But there's a community in gaming, and gaming is a competitive activity. Competitive activities promote classification and ranking, thus justifying the existence of a professional category playing in large tournaments. Professionals spend all day perfecting their craft, and it would make little sense to not receive compensation for it, thus explaining the proliferation of sponsors and salaries.
I think that talent could be used somewhere else with a more widespread outcome, like solving difficult problems in economics. However, it must be pretty cool to live off of gaming (for the gamers, that is).
I haven't done any research on this, but if I had to make an educated guess, I highly doubt it does, especially when placed in comparison to emissions from environmentally-unfriendly automobiles, CFCs from spray products and other ozone-depleting contributors. Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong, but I highly doubt that manufacturing beer emits tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
If it does, then pop beverage would probably be just as big, if not a bigger, contributor to the greenhouse effect, which I highly doubt to be true.
To all of those that can't stand one day of media humor:
If you're after real news, why not go check out Google News or something? While Slashdot does miss the mark sometimes, it provides mostly serious and very insightful articles day in, day out. One day of silliness isn't going to kill anyone.
I don't agree with a lot of Apple's vice-grip control over their software and hardware, but I'd gladly pay $500 in order to install OS X legitimately and still be able to use Windows when I need to.
Actually, I'd probably be able to SAVE in doing so, since refurbished Macbooks and Mac Pros can run cheaper than new Dells and carry the same quality and warranty policies as their off-the-shelf products. All I know is that my next notebook is absolutely going to be a Macbook or a Macbook Pro. I'm done with Windows-only machines.
Since the article used the Adamo as their example, I went ahead and did a price check between a Macbook Air and an Adamo.
Turns out that for only $300 MORE, the Air will provide you with a CPU that's 400 MHz faster, the 128 GB SSD and dedicated graphics, along with OS X Leopard and the ability to run Windows Vista (probably better than the Adamo can).
Aren't CEOs of software megaconglomerates like Microsoft supposed to do this kind of research before talking smack?
As a fourth-year Computer Engineering student with over a year of corporate working experience, I can recommend that starting in tech support is probably the BEST way to learn how to maneuver your way through the corporate environment (if that's where you ultimately want to stay). There is no other tech job that I can think of (or that I have worked) that allows you to meet and chat with an extremely diverse number of people and learn so many skills while on the job. Additionally, you get to learn about people, which will help you significantly in understanding how requirements are written and passed on to the developer.
You're probably right, but there are very few ways to learn ALL of that while you're in school, unless you're very self-determined. I think that all of those skills can be learned as one garners more experience in the working world.
Slashdot Mirror
I peered through the paper, and I don't exactly see how throttling the processor to very low speeds (lower than Speedstep) when idle solves less than optimizing CPU clock speed based on user activity. When properly configured, the speed "bursts" are as short as the burst is needed (i.e. when loading a program, or when compiling), and multiple step levels ensure that the CPU isn't going from minimum to maximum instantaneously (though this behavior can be configured).
Maybe I just missed the point.
Actually, I choose job locations far from my home because it's more miles for me to bike, but we're the minority.
Unfortunately, several thousand iPhone owners would probably disagree with your ideology. Most people use their cell phones as tools too, except not in the same light as you use yours. To some, having a cameraphone or gaming capability is of utmost importance; that doesn't make them any more of an immature customer.
I owned an iPhone for a while, and while I was mostly pleased with it, I found it to be very premature as a smart-phone. It met the general requirements for everything except internet browsing, where it exceeded them in spades, but only barely. If iPhone 3.0 changes that, then I might go back. I am, however, getting more interested in the Android platform.
For those that have used an iPhone previously, what differences should I keep in mind while making the transition? Does the G1 play music as good as the iPhone/iPod Touch does? How is its e-mail client? How does internet browsing compare?
I posed this very same question to a group of tech entrepreneurs in a list that I'm subscribed to. A lot of them see immense value in Twitter because of the speed in which things "click" on it. If you're "followed" enough, you can literally create one tag and have a massive following on the Internet playing along with it in a matter of minutes, largely because a lot of people use the service through their phones.
It's also a very effective marketing tool, as Oprah and Ellen DeGeneres have shown. In addition, it gives people who are totally un-tech-savvy a super simple outlet to pushing their ideas, which a lot of marketing folk fit nicely in (no offense to the sales people that are savvy).
A lot of people also find it a useful journalistic tool. The low-flying plane incident that happened in New York recently is a great example of Twitter's broadcasting power, since several thousand Twitter users wrote about it within minutes of it happening and almost certainly before the news outlets could get to it. The speed at which information spreads on there is fascinating, though the amount of crap that spreads follows the trend. It's kind of expected, though, when you mix well-informed people having fun with Twitter with those that lack even a slithering of character...
Again, I use it mostly for fun, but it's effectiveness almost wholly depends on those that you're connected to. In a matter of days, I found out about lots of specials and niceties that I would have been left out on without Twitter. Not saying that it's the best source for that, but it's pretty good. Wouldn't surprise me if it was a one-hit wonder, though.
Because apparently a lot of tech entrepreneurs and VCs see a fortitude for possibility in Twitter. I use it for fun, but its value really depends on whom you connect with.
I don't use the lingo, though. Twittering, tweeting, tweetup, etc et al. all sound about as vapid as "Googling" something. It's like ordering a "Grande" at Starbucks; sounds just as dumb as it is.
I have used a Windows XP machine on 256 MB RAM with an older Pentium IV processor, and it ran fine for everyday things. Moving the swap to another drive/empty partition helps.
If it's just Moz Firefox and Microsoft Office, it'll run great.
Actually, the ISA slots can be an incredible help in troubleshooting issues when PCI/PCIe/Integrated Video/AGP do not work. I think that one way to tell if there was a hardware issue before was to plug an ISA video card and check.
Question: does Verizon even have a forum for business customers? When my parent's business was under a business plan with Verizon, the support was stellar and we never got an "uneducated" representative.
In short, I think that there will always be a market for dedicated, paid support teams, especially for internal support scenarios.
What happens when you have most of a country of over one billion people trained to be consistently nationalistic?
In fact, I thought that this was already well-known information.
Actually, fructose and glucose are similar, except that fructose is a simple sugar and metabolizes directly to the liver (source), whereas everything metabolizes glucose. Fructose is good for controlling hunger, though. A lot of the negative effects of it come from ingesting over the recommended minimum (50 mg/day).
I actually read up a while ago that the minimum amount of regular exercise required is 30 minutes (read here). I can understand how doing short, but quick bursts of intense exercise works, since that would catalyze the burning of lactic acid described above. However, I really don't think doing quick sprints like that is a good idea because most people might get the idea that a 3-minute stretch or so is good enough to start doing shock exercise like that, when from my experience, it can lead to cramping and other muscular problems.
Personally, what works for me is having a healthy diet (which does include two cups of GOOD coffee), commuting to work by bike, doing long, endurance-pace rides on weekends and some calisthenics at home to keep the upper body muscles reasonably strong.
Thanks for this advice. I have had trouble sleeping for a few nights, and I think it has to do with the second cup of coffee I take in before bedtime. I'll definitely keep this in mind.
That was Dan Brown.
I think that ability is strengthened much further when said person actually appreciates their job. That's just me, though.
When you're not paid overtime, or when you hate your job, I think working the bare minimum is much more attractive. There was one job where I could have made a significant return on overtime, but I didn't like the line of work, so nothing could make want to stay there past my end time.
Fortunately, as a student, I still have options before I have to start looking for a job to actually survive on it.
I am very passionate about cycling, and tried racing, but didn't like it. However, niche sports like these all suffer from the same problem:
They don't have a mass audience.
There are millions of people that will watch a game of football, baseball, basketball or soccer (especially soccer) on a (n>inf)" widescreen plasma LCD TV (or any TV, really) at home, or in the pub/bar, supermarket, while shopping, etc. I postulate that a reason for this is that the action and "spirit" of each sport caters to different, but sufficiently large, populations. Those that like lots of back and forth action watch basketball, and those that like a bit of brutality in that action watch football or hockey. (Yes, I'm generalizing here.) Those that like calculated behaviors, but sparse explosions of action, watch something like baseball. Etc. ad nauseum. Additionally, there is nothing that can replace these sports. They are popular and irreplaceable, hence they garner a large market.
Sports like cycling, on the other hand, have very little action except for possibly the end. Has anyone ever actually watched a professional bike race? They are LONG, and riders spend most of that time collaborating tactically with each other to reach and sprint for the finish. They HELP each other throughout the race; where's the competition? Unless you are a real enthusiast, you can't watch a bike race in a bar, or anywhere fun. At least for me, it's hard to even watch it at home, and I love cycling. Top that with the ridiculous amount of doping incidents (that do make the press, since ESPN cares to write about THAT than actually broadcast races), and you have yourself a mass loser.
Gaming suffers the same fate. Only gamers would want to watch gamers play. There are outliers, but they are just that. But there's a community in gaming, and gaming is a competitive activity. Competitive activities promote classification and ranking, thus justifying the existence of a professional category playing in large tournaments. Professionals spend all day perfecting their craft, and it would make little sense to not receive compensation for it, thus explaining the proliferation of sponsors and salaries.
I think that talent could be used somewhere else with a more widespread outcome, like solving difficult problems in economics. However, it must be pretty cool to live off of gaming (for the gamers, that is).
Burn him.
I can see what the poster tried to do here, but something is weak here.
Ah yes, it's the sauce.
Can CADIE do something funny so that I can get more lolz here?
I haven't done any research on this, but if I had to make an educated guess, I highly doubt it does, especially when placed in comparison to emissions from environmentally-unfriendly automobiles, CFCs from spray products and other ozone-depleting contributors. Additionally, correct me if I'm wrong, but I highly doubt that manufacturing beer emits tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
If it does, then pop beverage would probably be just as big, if not a bigger, contributor to the greenhouse effect, which I highly doubt to be true.
Good question.
To all of those that can't stand one day of media humor:
If you're after real news, why not go check out Google News or something? While Slashdot does miss the mark sometimes, it provides mostly serious and very insightful articles day in, day out. One day of silliness isn't going to kill anyone.
Doesn't AT&T also charge for the full price of the phone if the contract is broken?
I don't agree with a lot of Apple's vice-grip control over their software and hardware, but I'd gladly pay $500 in order to install OS X legitimately and still be able to use Windows when I need to.
Actually, I'd probably be able to SAVE in doing so, since refurbished Macbooks and Mac Pros can run cheaper than new Dells and carry the same quality and warranty policies as their off-the-shelf products. All I know is that my next notebook is absolutely going to be a Macbook or a Macbook Pro. I'm done with Windows-only machines.
Since the article used the Adamo as their example, I went ahead and did a price check between a Macbook Air and an Adamo.
Turns out that for only $300 MORE, the Air will provide you with a CPU that's 400 MHz faster, the 128 GB SSD and dedicated graphics, along with OS X Leopard and the ability to run Windows Vista (probably better than the Adamo can).
Aren't CEOs of software megaconglomerates like Microsoft supposed to do this kind of research before talking smack?
As a fourth-year Computer Engineering student with over a year of corporate working experience, I can recommend that starting in tech support is probably the BEST way to learn how to maneuver your way through the corporate environment (if that's where you ultimately want to stay). There is no other tech job that I can think of (or that I have worked) that allows you to meet and chat with an extremely diverse number of people and learn so many skills while on the job. Additionally, you get to learn about people, which will help you significantly in understanding how requirements are written and passed on to the developer.
You're probably right, but there are very few ways to learn ALL of that while you're in school, unless you're very self-determined. I think that all of those skills can be learned as one garners more experience in the working world.