Except that GPU architecture is pretty different from that of a CPU. IANAE(xpert), but from what I understand the GPU is very, very, parallel compared to a CPU thanks to how easily parallelized most graphics problems are. Though CPUs are gaining more cores, I think that the difficulty in parallelizing many problems places a practical limit on the CPU's parallelism.

That's not to say though that a GPU-type parallel core can't be integrated into the CPU package, however. I believe NVIDIA is doing some of this?

Obviously. Later post-Bill versions of Windows changed it to just, "Computer"...

...unless you're a lawyer. Look at the RIAA, SCO, et al. Their 'businesses' are all suffering while the lawyers laugh all the way to the bank.

It's a damn shame that the trial lawyer lobby is so strong.

Don't take this as a personal criticism, because it's not... For those who want to properly use the phrase "Beg the Question" though, here's a fun explanation:

http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=693

...We ain't got shit. Seriously though, I was actually in a RS the other day analyzing the store a little while talking to a long-time clerk. People say that RS is trying to compete with Best Buy, et cetera; that's not quite it, in my opinion. What they are really doing here is setting up a national chain of third-party mobile phone stores.

When you walk into the typical RS, the front 30-40% of the store is almost entirely given over to mobiles and accessories. Looking at their website, the first item on the top menu bar is "Phones and Radio Communications" with the first item in that menu being "Accessories" (the highest-margin part of the mobile business). Every time I checkout, I get asked how long I've had my current mobile phone.

Not even considering the classic component selection, the other consumer electronics stuff is a distant second to mobile. The clerk I spoke with said they're lucky to sell a couple TVs per month. And why *would* they do any better than that, when Wal-Mart knocks the shorts off them in price?

Does the new business model piss me off as an electronics hobbyist? Yeah, sure it does. I wanted to get a power MOSFET the other day and the highest-voltage part they had was an IRF510. They carry silver solder, but no flux. Etchant but no copper-clad boards. However, I don't blame them if they aren't making any money selling that stuff.

In my opinion, there's one way left to make money on a retail electronics-as-in-making-them store. Forget about the mall, and set it up as a hobby-type shop where you put on classes, offer support, and so on. Similar in a sense to a traditional 'hobby'-type store like Michael's or Hobby Lobby; they sell cake decorating gear by putting on classes featuring said gear. In the right environment, say a college town, there's no reason that a small, owner-operated hobby electronics shop couldn't make it if they're not having to pay mall rents. Put on an Arduino workshop, and sell those suckers at 150% the usual markup. Passives assortments at $20/pop. Saturday-morning robot showoff session. Have a tiny lab in the store with a couple o-scopes and DMMs where people could come in and work on their projects for some nominal fee. Would it satisfy the profit desires of corporate America? No. But it'd probably pay the owner's mortgage...

" 'The mere act of swimming implies that some water travels with the swimmer," said CalTech engineer Kakani Katija"

Temporary vortices aside, I think that Sir Isaac Newton might take issue with this statement.

It's probably instructive to look at which software publishers DO currently allow resale of their licenses. Mainly, it seems to be those selling expensive, niche software who need to convince a portion of their buyers that a portion of their investment can be recouped when it's time to upgrade or if the product doesn't work out. Unfortunately, a $50 or $60 game doesn't have nearly the psychological effect on its purchaser as a $2000 CAD package. Further, given that most games end up in the hands of people who aren't using them to run a business, they're less likely to vote their dollars against someone who doesn't allow resale.

It is interesting though, to consider the competitive advantage that a publisher might gain by allowing resale in a world where the ability to resell isn't the norm. I suppose it is possible that someone would buy FPS #1 over FPS #2 if #1's publisher allowed resale. Too bad that most buy solely on the basis of web hype.