The primary purpose of a door is to provide an in/out mechanism. No, the primary purpose of a door is to close an opening. An opening which has a door is called a doorway. An opening without a door may be referred to as something else. The door is the barrier by which an entry is closed and opened.
I'll grant you that in common parlance the word doorway is often shorted to just door, but technically that is not correct.
This kind of misses the point, actually. The purpose of a door, other than to keep heat in, is to DENY access. If you don't need to deny access, you don't need a door. Having a door at all is analagous to enabling WPA or WEP.
By contrast, the purpose of a router is to ALLOW access. Only the encryption routines and MAC filtering are there to filter that access.
In Enterprise, you really, really don't care about shiny baubles Inaccurate. C?Os dig shiny, useless stuff. Touche. But luckily, that's what Windows Mobile is for.
There are some things about Vista which are better than XP.
The restructured Users folder, for example. Finally 'My Music' is moved out of the My Documents folder, making backups, once again, possible for basic end users.
The improved desktop rendering, which small matter though it may be, was well overdue for an overhaul.
There are some things which are worse in Vista, and we all know about them.
The copying speed.
The shutdown menu, and the fact that hibernation NEVER works.
Ultimately however, and this is where I intend to get relevant, there is nothing significant enough to recommend a switch from XP to Vista. And that's a statement that few people would argue with, and it's a damning statement. The more you think about about, the worse it gets.
And when you step into the world of Enterprise, and big business, things are even worse. In Enterprise, you really, really don't care about shiny baubles. All you care about is that it works, and it stays working, and it never works any worse than it used to.
Aging though it may be, XPs relevancy is not in decline. Windows Server 2003 does not want for much, in the way of mission critical upgrades, and what it does want for, Windows Server 2008 will not be providing.
When you see a title that is DX10 ONLY, then the performance DX10 offers will be noticeable, until then, all we are getting is eye candy. Maybe your eyes are better than mine, but I don't think we're even getting that.
If you are going to argue DX10 is bad I'm not. Bundling it into Vista is bad, for a slew of reasons, and the shit they've pulled with several 'Vista only' titles, and the Crysis ini-locking is enough to errode customer confidence in there being any kind of need to have done that.
I see absolutely nothing to recommend Vista over XP, at this time or in the near future. Sure, there are things that are better in Vista than XP, but none of them, or even all of them, combine to reason enough to switch.
Hardly a year out of date. The figures you post are one month old, and involve Vista SP1 final, vs SP3 of XP. I admit I am impressed by the evening out that Vista has managed to achieve, in those tests.
I used to be near the front of the queue for each new line of graphics cards. I used to wait just long enough for the first price drops, and then stump up. Cost me a couple of hundred quid a year, after the sale of whatever my old card was, to stay top of the line. Compared to owning and running a car, which I don't, owning and running a super-rig was positively cheap (in the UK). Some might call it a waste of money, and I have sympathy for that argument, but it was my hobby, and it was worth it, to me.
This year I put my disposable income towards getting in on all three next generation consoles, and the PC will languish for a long time yet.
I don't think I've changed, I think the market has changed.
They're getting bigger and hotter, and no longer feel like cutting edge kit. They feel like an attempt to squeeze more life out of old technology.
DirectX 10 as a selling point is a joke, with the accompanying baggage that is Vista all it does is slow games down, and none of them look any better for it yet. In any case, there are only five or six of them. You can pick up an 8800GT 512 for less than 150 dollars these days, and it's a powerhouse, unless you're gaming in full 1080p. There is no motivation to put one of those power hungry bricks in my rig. Nothing gets any prettier these days, and FPS is well taken care of at 1680x1050 or below.
Game over, graphics cards.
I wonder what will happen if everyone figures this out? Imagine a world in which the next gen of consoles is no longer subsidised, or driven, by PC enthusiasts...
if you buy a gun then it's yours, but you still aren't allowed to modify it in such a way that it is illegal (eg upgrade it to semi automatic, saw of the barrel(s) to make it easier to conceal). Now it may be the action that is illegal, but in practice the problem is that you are creating an item which it is illegal to own. If it is illegal to own a modded console, then it may well be illegal to mod one as well.
not a games company. Yes they make games, but their engines are what shine. The doom 3 technology looked fantastic. It's when other companies license id's engines. That's when we see a better game. The startling thing is how few licencees there were for Doom 3 engine. Prey, Quake Wars...
Call of Duty was released using Quake 3 engine SIX YEARS after it debuted, and was arguably the last AAA Q3 engine game - one of seemingly hundreds of titles.
I got burned on Half Life 2. I bought the game on release, and was unable to play the game for 2 days because steam was down. I made a decision at that time to never buy another product that requires online activation.
I have not played bioshock, or the orange box due to this. I'm with you buddy, but let me just say that if there is a game on this earth worth sacficing your principles for, it's Portal.
I hate how publishers have finally used technological measures to achieve what the courts won't grant them. This should be flat out explicitly illegal. And it probably is. But who's going to sue over a game? Software has had it cushy for decades, pretending to be a license when it benefits the company, pretending to be a purchase when it reduces the consumer's rights to support. They've been having their cake and eating it for as long as the industry has been in play.
Courts don't understand computers, and not that many people are willing to sue over a video game, or even an operating system.
They're breaking the law, and removing your right to do as you want with a product that you have purchased. That's far worse than pirating software, as a matter of fact - so all moral high ground has now been lost.
People look at games like Crysis which has been pirated to an extreme I buy all the games I bother to play these days. Some of my friends do not. I don't know if this problem has gotten any worse.
What I do know is that most of these friends could not even be bothered to pirate crysis. Their poor sales are due to the fact that very few people care about bland, boring, ordinary, bog standard games on the PC these days.
The problem is that we're in a lose-lose situation with PC games. If we don't buy a game because of its terrible copy protection, then companies blame piracy for poor sales. If we do buy the game anyway, it just reinforces the idea that strong copy prevention works.
All the consumer can realistically do is cease to care about gaming on the PC at all, and I think it's fair to say that we're seeing that happen now. (It helps a lot of the game in question is near lethally boring in action).
Ultimately, (single player) PC gaming won't die out through lack of money, it will be smothered to death by its own industry.
I'm no expert in this field, but this sounds to me like computers in isolated areas would suddenly get the shaft. Am I missing something? I don't know. Are you an albanian goatherd using a 2400bps modem from your moutainside shack?
If so, then I guess you're probably missing something. However, if you're in that situation, you can put torrenting for prawns near the bottom of the list.
Yet another reason not to buy an Xbox 720 until well into its lifespan. Sony's first adopters can play PS2 games, Microsoft's have a smaller hard drive, no HDMI port, DRM issues that get in the way of upgrading either, and now this. And how cynical is the marketing strategy that says 'Buy now - before we take your USB ports and backwards compatibility away?'
Odd, considering it comes from the same company who lied about the importance of 'Rumble' until they had their patent issues straigtened out.
And - honestly now - screw any conserved media. A wildlife documentary around the age of 10 or so every once and a while is ok - but it's not before well into teenage that children can really gain knowledge from these. I could not disagree with your terrible bullshit more, sir.
I can remember being ten. I can remember being nine. I can remember being eight. And so on, until a very early age.
And one of the things I remember most strongly is the influence of scientific materials in my life. I remember being enthralled by David Attenborough's documentarys, I remember books about space and beyond. Many of us geeks do have fond, fantastic childhood memories of such works from VERY early in our lives. And here you are telling us that children under a certain age simply cannot understand?
Nonsense, and my life would have been very much poorer without such input.
The general vision and direction of Ubuntu is where it has to go to start getting mass support. And who cares? Even if Ubuntu starts to do evil things, all would never be lost in the open-source community. The real reason open-source projects are so infrequently odious is that satan doesn't want us to see the libraries for pure, undiluted evil.
I don't know what he's worried about, it's not like they'd be well commented.
Is this one of those internet boom style companies that only makes money in theory, or do they actually have an income source? They've figured out a way to power light aircraft using only the condensed ire of militant slackware users.
The question I always had about this- if they can take one sample from one animal and clone it in a vat and feed this world, will the vegans be ok with that? Hell, you can take a sample from ME if it will feed the whole world.
The best comparrison is the best day of any given season in England is the worst day of the same season in California. Hence, even in mid winter, you can wander outside in a t-shirt at lunchtime, soak up the sun, and feel good about life. Of course that's just one part of the states. Try it in Minnesota and you're in for a shock. I live in Scotland. I could walk around in a T-Shirt in Lapland and my nipples wouldn't even get hard.
Slashdot Mirror
I'll grant you that in common parlance the word doorway is often shorted to just door, but technically that is not correct.
By contrast, the purpose of a router is to ALLOW access. Only the encryption routines and MAC filtering are there to filter that access.
'I've just bought these new shoes and...'
'Really, I prefer Linux'.
I think the term is 'you sir, basically an end'
The restructured Users folder, for example. Finally 'My Music' is moved out of the My Documents folder, making backups, once again, possible for basic end users.
The improved desktop rendering, which small matter though it may be, was well overdue for an overhaul.
There are some things which are worse in Vista, and we all know about them.
The copying speed.
The shutdown menu, and the fact that hibernation NEVER works.
Ultimately however, and this is where I intend to get relevant, there is nothing significant enough to recommend a switch from XP to Vista. And that's a statement that few people would argue with, and it's a damning statement. The more you think about about, the worse it gets.
And when you step into the world of Enterprise, and big business, things are even worse. In Enterprise, you really, really don't care about shiny baubles. All you care about is that it works, and it stays working, and it never works any worse than it used to.
Aging though it may be, XPs relevancy is not in decline. Windows Server 2003 does not want for much, in the way of mission critical upgrades, and what it does want for, Windows Server 2008 will not be providing.
I see absolutely nothing to recommend Vista over XP, at this time or in the near future. Sure, there are things that are better in Vista than XP, but none of them, or even all of them, combine to reason enough to switch.
As for your comments about Vista being slower than XP in gaming, you are a year behind. Here read a few pages: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2302499,00.aspHardly a year out of date. The figures you post are one month old, and involve Vista SP1 final, vs SP3 of XP. I admit I am impressed by the evening out that Vista has managed to achieve, in those tests.
This year I put my disposable income towards getting in on all three next generation consoles, and the PC will languish for a long time yet.
I don't think I've changed, I think the market has changed.
They're getting bigger and hotter, and no longer feel like cutting edge kit. They feel like an attempt to squeeze more life out of old technology.
DirectX 10 as a selling point is a joke, with the accompanying baggage that is Vista all it does is slow games down, and none of them look any better for it yet. In any case, there are only five or six of them. You can pick up an 8800GT 512 for less than 150 dollars these days, and it's a powerhouse, unless you're gaming in full 1080p. There is no motivation to put one of those power hungry bricks in my rig. Nothing gets any prettier these days, and FPS is well taken care of at 1680x1050 or below.
Game over, graphics cards.
I wonder what will happen if everyone figures this out? Imagine a world in which the next gen of consoles is no longer subsidised, or driven, by PC enthusiasts...
Call of Duty was released using Quake 3 engine SIX YEARS after it debuted, and was arguably the last AAA Q3 engine game - one of seemingly hundreds of titles.
Where are all the Doom3 tech games?
Courts don't understand computers, and not that many people are willing to sue over a video game, or even an operating system.
They're breaking the law, and removing your right to do as you want with a product that you have purchased. That's far worse than pirating software, as a matter of fact - so all moral high ground has now been lost.
What I do know is that most of these friends could not even be bothered to pirate crysis. Their poor sales are due to the fact that very few people care about bland, boring, ordinary, bog standard games on the PC these days.
The problem is that we're in a lose-lose situation with PC games. If we don't buy a game because of its terrible copy protection, then companies blame piracy for poor sales. If we do buy the game anyway, it just reinforces the idea that strong copy prevention works.
All the consumer can realistically do is cease to care about gaming on the PC at all, and I think it's fair to say that we're seeing that happen now. (It helps a lot of the game in question is near lethally boring in action).
Ultimately, (single player) PC gaming won't die out through lack of money, it will be smothered to death by its own industry.
If so, then I guess you're probably missing something. However, if you're in that situation, you can put torrenting for prawns near the bottom of the list.
Odd, considering it comes from the same company who lied about the importance of 'Rumble' until they had their patent issues straigtened out.
+1 controller
+1 cell processor
+1 more fanboy community support ( see people who pay for PS3 )
Your math is terrible, the PS3 controller is godawful, the Cell is underwhelming and 'fanboys' are a minus ten in anyone's book.
Unless you're a fanboy in which case your opinion is worthless.
There are things the PS3 does well, but you don't list them.
I can remember being ten. I can remember being nine. I can remember being eight. And so on, until a very early age.
And one of the things I remember most strongly is the influence of scientific materials in my life. I remember being enthralled by David Attenborough's documentarys, I remember books about space and beyond. Many of us geeks do have fond, fantastic childhood memories of such works from VERY early in our lives. And here you are telling us that children under a certain age simply cannot understand?
Nonsense, and my life would have been very much poorer without such input.
I don't know what he's worried about, it's not like they'd be well commented.
Ah, gravity, my constant foe.
No good, you wouldn't be able to see it when doing a nightly build.