Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:I Have Plans Now (Score 1) 222

All the answers to the contrary which you are going to get are wrong, wrong, wrong.

By far the best version is the original theatrical cut. The international release is very slightly better (one minute of "scary violence" is cut from the U.S. release), but either that or the U.S. release will do very nicely. This is the only version with Ford's voiceover, which is absolutely essential to understanding what is going on. It also adds tremendously to the noir feel.

The only way I know for sure to get this version is to get one of the multi-disc sets which include the "1982 theatrical release" (the 5-disc blu-ray set is a slam dunk). You can also get it on cable, but I doubt it is the only version circulating on cable or streaming.

All other versions (rare original workprint, 1986 U.S. broadcast version, 1992 director's cut, 2007 final cut) are CRAP in comparison.

Comment Re:Illogical (Score 1) 411

Nonsense. Better than 50% of males "get that far". A male in the U.S. reaching age 65 today can statistically expect to live, on average, until age 84.3.

83 is neither unusually young, nor unusually old, to die.

Comment Standing head (Score 1) 599

"Republicans Back Down" is what is known in the trade of journalism as a "standing head". It is a newspaper headline, all preset in type, ready to be used for ANY morning's newspaper. That is how predictable Republicans are. They will ALWAYS back down, because it is all Kabuki Theatre. All they can imagine is being obstructionist, with no real agenda whatsoever of their own, and their pre-planned end strategy is to ALWAYS throw up their hands and say "oh, well".

I'll make it plainer. They have all turned into a bunch of PUNKS. Anyone who takes them seriously is a SAP.

Comment Re:Anyone remember the NSA? (Score 1) 599

How twisted do you have to be to believe that, to prevent the government from tyranny, you have to try to prevent it from fulfilling its proper function? I ask you seriously. If your government has turned against the people, your society is in deep doo doo, and worrying yourself sick about little details like this is not just silly, it is failing to face the real problem.

Comment Re:Operating at 20W gives zero improvement. (Score 1) 114

I guess maybe I should care more about the low end market I guess. I'm not that customer nor are most/all corporate customers. I buy $500 monitors not $500 computers. But I guess a lot of the market goes to ~$700 laptops and $500 desktops so in consumer land they might have a winner.

Comment Re:Operating at 20W gives zero improvement. (Score 0) 114

South bridge is pretty cheap: http://www.aliexpress.com/pric... . I guess the mobo would be simpler too giving you more savings but I don't think it would do it. Still say $300 for a crappy AMD based system and $500 for a 2X faster intel system: other than the dirt poor I know which one I'd recommend. Anyone using a computer for more than a glorified smartphone has time with a value. It doesn't take many minutes throughout the year to equal the cost difference. IMO you are almost guaranteed for professional use that all but the top end $5000 gaming rigs will earn their money back in their lifetime in employee productivity/retention.

Comment Re:Operating at 20W gives zero improvement. (Score 1) 114

I agree. But they haven't really been competitive in the desktop market for about 7 years. I hope they do better because I'm not a fan of monopolies. Strictly on price isn't the way to go IMO. Other than the most basic users (secretaries, store clerks and the like) I think the computer as a tool to do work well it never pays to be (far) off the current best of breed. AMD has been in the bargain basement i7 territory for a while. I'm not convinced this architecture is going to do it though. We'll see.

Comment Re: To answer your question (Score 1) 279

Also if you are buying mainstream hardware not building your own things are much closer. Ex: Dell XPS using i7 4770k I think. If you compare that to the ~2500 upgraded i7 version of a macbook pro they are only about 200 points difference between the CPU mark scores. Sure the mac has a newer CPU but that might be the way of things: laptops get updated every year or so but desktops are allowed to age their way into budget market and then sit their for a couple years before the manufacturer finally has to make a new "premium" PC. If you build your own you can do better but personally messing with hardware isn't my thing and I just don't care enough (as I'd guess the majority of people).

Comment Re: To answer your question (Score 1) 279

Laptop manufacturers have you but the short hairs because if you want to do work while mobile they really are the best option. Since (at least till the last say 10 years) business was the main reason for the devices margins could be a bit higher. Anyways it isn't like they just said: hey lets make a low powered device. There are more thermal and energy considerations in something that has to sit on your lap, be thin and run on a battery versus a big honking box, not touching you that has continual access to power.

Slashdot Top Deals

UNIX is hot. It's more than hot. It's steaming. It's quicksilver lightning with a laserbeam kicker. -- Michael Jay Tucker

Working...