I guess one thing which may have changed is that the supposedly "PC gamers" and what is the average there may have decreased / isn't even counted for any more because so many have moved to more portable stuff so what one view as a "serious PC rig" as among the best there is out there whereas previously maybe the consoles was compared to a PC more people had.

AKA compare the Xbox One to a tablet and you won't be disappointed by the performance ..

EA made their claim how the PCs couldn't run the new FIFA 14 engine, some people are like WHAT?! but the thing is likely that yeah, the most dedicated gamers with the latest and most expensive gear could run it. But most people is either lagging the latest technology simply by when they bought their rig or they have a reasonably priced laptop or something such and that's not the latest and greatest gaming PCs and is inferior to the Xbox One and Playstation 4.

FWIV - Also 1080p games and with possibly more details and AA would still of course be nicer than 720.

Xbox, 2001-2002. 64 MB 200 MHz DDR shared graphics memory, 733 MHz PIII-ish, 233 MHz NV2A.
Geometry engine: 115 million vertices/second, 125 million particles/second (peak)
932 megapixels/second (233 MHz Ã-- 4 pipelines), 1,864 megatexels/second (932 MP Ã-- 2 texture units) (peak)
(CPU random page 3 GLFOPS, GPU? Nvidia supposedly claim 80, some Xbox book say 22 in total.)

Xbox 360, 2005-2006, 512 MB 700 MHz GDDR3, 3,2 GHz Tri-Core PowerPC, 500 MHz Xenos, 500 MHz 10 MiB eDRAM.
Maximum vertex count: 6 billion vertices per second, 240 GFLOPS
Maximum pixel fillrate: 16 gigasamples per second fillrate using 4X multisample anti aliasing. Maximum texel fillrate: 8 gigatexels per second (16 textures Ã-- 500 MHz)

Xbox One, 2013-2014, 8 GB DDR3, 1.75 GHz Octo-core AMD APU, 853 MHz AMD GCN, 32 MB ESRAM.
1.31 TFLOPS.
"Xbox One supports 4K resolution (3840Ã--2160) (2160p) video" (So for something like "New super mario bros" I guess 4K wouldn't had been impossible.)

I don't know how much you can trust the numbers but from the claimed GFLOPS numbers Xbox One with be 5.5 * Xbox 360 which would be 3 * Xbox.

But it took 4 years to get to Xbox 360 and 8 years to get to Xbox One.

Still obviously better.
Previously my impression was that consoles use close to top of the line hardware when released and as is I don't see the AMD APU as such, but it's still GTX 650-650TI area and more GK106 GTX 660 for the PS4 (looking at gflops alone.)

That isn't the best you can get but it just recently was the "reasonable budget high-end" or something such, isn't the 760 still same GPU but higher clocked? Sure going all the way to 770/780/R290X may be worth it from a price/performance perspective but it's still up there.

People have problem enough running QHD games with one graphics card. Gaming (advanced looking game) isn't something which would happen with current gen graphics so that's totally out of the question.

I used them once or twice for non-private files. Glad I know this now. I don't plan to use dropbox anymore.

"There's a bunch of fighter jets in my pickled cucumbers!"

Good point, I usually watch Colbert on Hulu

A lose-lose situation.

Colbert's fans get deprive of The Colbert Report.

Colbert loses viewers from going on at a later time and having his humor constrained by the stricter rules of broadcast television.

It seems like Letterman's ( or Leno's ) job is a place where comedians losing steam go to wait to die.

But your comment is!

(Damn is weird, I wondered what page I was on, if it was some blog post I had ended up in or whatever.) .. no html quote tag in it either? I'll keep it and post this way anyway just to show how stupid it is.

Rocketpacks have been around for long, they run out quickly though.

Jetpacks I think they also used later. (One of the guys really into it died (I don't think it was from the pack.))

As in can it shot down missiles or not? And if so which ones?

Honestly if there were barriers to creating a semi-monopolistic software monoculture, I don't think that would necessarily be a bad thing.

But two swing out of the realm of opinion, you compare Windows XP to "OpenSource darlings like firefox" whose long-term support is measured in "months, not years". This is a bad comparison. A better comparison would be Ubuntu LTS which includes firefox and whose support is measured in years not months. However Canonical having only a fraction of a percent of the marketshare that Windows XP does, is not making a business model in supporting releases for over 14 years.

The key difference is any independent software vendor can with a very low barrier to entry. At my previous employer we had production software stack (purchased from a company) which dependent on Redhat 7.3 (not RHEL 7), but you know the one with 2.4 kernel from the 90s. Of course it was impossible to get updates from Redhat, but I made the vendor provide tested procedures for upgrading zlib and openssh and it was possible for them to do this.

I think it would be a great idea to require Microsoft to "open up" even if it was outside of their interests. Hell if Windows 8 could not compete with community supported open source XP, it still means that people get better software :)

In Russia it seems like government and orthodox church leaders have teamed up to become an unbeatable force http://www.newsweek.com/putins...

That goat.cx-guy?

I'll be known as ...

... Cowboy Neal!

It's dark outside.

It's night.

This wouldn't help me get to bed earlier anyway so why bother. (~04:42 local time as if it matters.)

Eh? Shutting down pedophiles would be a good thing just like shutting down an anti-gay bigot