International students are often more motivated to study, lifting the general class level.

This is one of the biggest over generalizations that I have seen on Slashdot, and it flies in the face of everything I saw in both my undergraduate and graduate level degrees. By and large, foreign students segregated themselves and studied as a group, which wouldn't be particularly noteworthy except when group participation was not allowed.

The vast majority of international students, particularly from Asia, are students simply seeking a degree rather than a skill or knowledge. Clearly, there will always be exceptions, but the reverse is definitely not true.

Java has had threading support since it was released. java.util.concurrent.Future appeared in Java 1.5, which was after C# and .NET appeared on the scene.

C#'s async keyword provides language level support to performing asynchronous work, as opposed to framework level support. As a Java developer, I do love the Executors (thread pools) provided by Java, but that is not really the same thing. It's just a shame that running C# on anything other than Windows is simply unrealistic, even with Mono.

As a language, Java is far behind C#, and it's even behind C++ since C++11. In terms of the JVM versus the CLR, they're relatively comparable and both have impressively good JIT engines.

In the first test, he explicitly mentions going back on his word to use a Linux machine.

Because of this discrepancy, I feel compelled to try out the Java version on a Linux server. The server used is a “c1.medium” on Amazon EC2. I install the two different Java classes and see essentially the same speeds. The HttpServer class takes about 14 seconds to process 15 requests. Not very good.
slashdot (http://s.tt/1yA3K)

The author is clearly not a Java developer, and the second test really calls the first test into question. In the first test, he is having trouble with socket connections, which proved devastating to Java's numbers. Then, he moved onto using ASP.NET versus JSP in the second test, and JSP did significantly better than his simple socket tests in Java.

The simple fact that he did not go back to figure out what was wrong with his first test demonstrates quite clearly that both sets of his results are useless. It should be obvious that he is a weak Java developer--even without seeing the code--and I suspect he is not a particularly strong C# developer either on the basis that he did not question the results.

That sounds interesting. What is "much higher usability" -- by itself that statement means nothing.

Ironic point.

Those are common features of android tablets (and kickstand and attachable keyboard are certainly available for iOS devices). What about their presence on the Surface makes the Surface notable for having them?

No one has anything as flat and integrated as the Touch Cover. No one. The Android tablets that do have kick stands are not the full width of the device; they're like little arms that extend, which prevents them from being useful in your lap, unless there is a newer Android tablet that I haven't seen, but I believe none of the mainstream ones have them built in anyway.

So, even though it came out after the new ipad it doesn't achieve the same resolution? That's a shame.

Yep. Given that the x86 model is 1080p, I suspect that doing the same resolution on the ARM chip was too taxing of the battery to justify it. They might have also made the decision before the Retina Display iPad was ever officially announced as well, which meant they went from beating the competition to being behind. Microsoft has to own up to this one, but the Metro UI does a very good job at hiding the lower resolution combined with ClearType.

Maybe you aren't aware that the lack of flash is a *feature*? Not everyone wants to have crappy flash apps whether its on a mobile device or not. My desktop systems are flash free since I have a choice in the matter.

I guess that means you're not running Chrome. But, anyway, I use Chrome on my desktops and I run FlashControl (way better than the other plugins) to limit Flash to websites that I choose, and that pretty much boils down to Hulu. I use tablets even more for entertainment than my desktops and Hulu is the last thing that I actually use Flash with, but I use it a lot (there is a Hulu Plus app, but I don't pay for Hulu, and therefore it serves no purpose for me on either tablet). So, as long as that's the only way to get Hulu, then Flash will unfortunately remain a feature. Once that door closes, or a better, legal alternative opens up to Hulu, then that won't change.

I will say, IE's biggest limitation is actually its general lack for simple plugin support akin to Chrome and Firefox, but mostly like Chrome. I wouldn't be surprised to see this coming with IE11, whenever that is, as that's the last real advantage Chrome has beyond WebGL, which I don't actually use, but plugins are a huge advantage that I miss, which is odd because I never really noticed missing them on my iPad with Safari (I suppose my only other plugin, AdBlocker in that case).

The Samsung Galaxy Tab is similar specs at similar price (even having flash, ugh!) with the advantage of a mature marketplace.

Only a true fan would dare to call Android's tablet marketplace mature. Unless something major happens, Windows RT-based apps will outnumber Android tablet apps by this time next year, and it will particularly out number them in the sense that you will actually be able to download one and know that it will work on your tablet.

Or, a new ipad is better specs and a mature marketplace for a similar price balanced by the lack of a USB port or SD card slot.

As you must be a technical user, it's stunning that you don't see the enormous benefit of having a USB port that can be used for anything with a working driver, and an expansion SD slot. I have already transferred files between machines using my Surface, and I am happy that I can plug in a mouse if I ever get tired of the mouse pad built into the Touch Cover. Shy of actual software development, which I tend to do on a desktop with dual monitors anyway, my Surface can completely replace my MacBook Pro. Technically, I can use the free Remote Desktop app to even enable that, but I hope that I am never in the need to do that.

I'm not certain that Windows will win in the tablet space, particularly because they do have the youngest ecosystem. However, with the ability to actually control everything analogous to a real computer--more so than even Android, shy of rooting, which no normal user will ever do--and plug in peripherals that use the same Windows driver model as, well, Windows, it opens up a lot of opportunity. Frankly, I hope that Android doesn't win until it's no longer hit or miss with support, and I hope Apple doesn't win because their tablet is a glorified gaming screen (that loses support after two years). I very seriously want them to compete heavily with Microsoft so that whoever does win gives us all the best product. After all, imagine Microsoft even attempting to do this 6 years ago. It would never have happened. It's only because of the competition that they've finally stopped pumping out delayed first releases like Vista (which, to be fair, is pretty much Windows 7 at this point after all of the patches and manufacturers fixing their drivers, with a few usability warts not present in Windows 7). I hope they put the pressure on everyone, and I hope it comes right back to them.

Actually a good catch (same to the Anonymous Coward making the same point 13 minutes later).

As you pointed out, I was referring to the Surface in my post, as I am frankly not very aware of what the competition is up too because I stopped looking around once I bought my Surface.

To be fair to the author, he released his software before there were any numbers.

To be fair to Windows RT, it's sold through an excessively limited distributed channel (Microsoft kiosks and Microsoft Stores). To then expect overnight miracles for a game that, admittedly, I have never heard of is a little astounding. Granted, 52 pounds is probably a bit of a shock, but having never heard of it (as an admitted iPad and Surface owner), I can't really say I am stunned.

It appears that he expected it be promoted by Microsoft because of their 10,000 pound investment, even though his company apparently refused to recompile and support x86, which sounds like an obvious no brainer. I cannot imagine that a game like theirs has many ARM-specific code blocks, and if it does, then I fully expect they are easily swappable for something in x86-land (if not just the high level language equivalent that would run faster on x86).

We are talking about a company with two mobile flops, and one of them was seemingly expected internally. The Kin was an undersupported and overpriced piece of junk thanks to Verizon (pricing it like a smartphone), with apparently a poor experience thanks to Microsoft. Windows Phone 7 appears to have been merely a stopgap to flesh out Metro, and to hold on until the Windows 8 kernel was ready for the phone.

As I have described in my random other posts, the Surface is actually a very solid (physically) device with much higher usability than my iPad (although I only have an iPad 2). Having a kickstand, USB port, microSD card expansion slot, attachable keyboard, larger (admittedly lower resolution than the "New iPad") screen, direct access to the file system and bundled Office makes the Surface worth iPad money. I'm honestly a bit stunned so many people hate it on Slashdot, beyond the obvious Microsoft bias, because it actually supports Flash. That's something that even Android cannot say ever since Adobe stopped supporting "mobile" platforms.

That is pretty humorous (for those that don't feel like checking his profile, it claims that he is a Microsoft employee).

That doesn't change the fact that your post combined "heavy" and "bulky." I will give you the fact that "bulky" is quite a subjective term, but heavy is not as subjective. It's a device that is larger than the competition, and the leading competition is the "New iPad." No one is looking at buying the iPad 2 versus the Surface, because the iPad 2 is so much cheaper, but it's also over a year and a half older. Regardless of the iPad, it shouldn't feel heavy because you should very rarely need to actually hold it in the air unlike the iPad. The kickstand alone enables much greater versatility, and it only increases when combined with the Touch Cover.

The Surface loses in the screen resolution corner (and the Surface Pro will continue to lose that fight). Now, as a power user, I would have definitely preferred something akin (maybe I should avoid the word "kin" with Microsoft) to the Retina display, but the heat and reduced battery life really loses it for me. Having said that, I have wanted the Retina display quality in a few games, although, to be fair, I haven't missed it in others. The Surface RT's screen does a good job hiding its lower resolution very well particularly alongside Metro (Microsoft Design), as it suits itself well to nice screens regardless of resolution.

I have both the Touch Cover and iPad Smart Cover, and I honestly can't feel a difference in weight even though it is just an iPad 2 (and not its heavier cousin). In all honesty, I strongly prefer the Touch Cover for multiple reasons. For starters, when combined with the built-in kickstand, I can comfortably use the Surface in my lap without holding it. In fact, I rarely find myself holding the Surface in the air, which is why I think that I really enjoy using it so much. Given a few minutes, I am sure that I could distinguish the heavier of the two, even when just talking 0.35 lbs (difference with covers), but that's frankly the best part about the Surface. I can actually use it on a table with or without the Touch Cover, whereas every iPad requires it, and even then the usability is greatly reduced. Using the Surface on my lap, I find that I have a harder time using the Touch Cover without a solid surface (no pun intended) beneath, and for less frequent typing I love being able to fold the Touch Cover under the kickstand, which lets me flatly rest the Surface on my legs, or even my stomach when I am laying down on my bed. That's something you cannot easily do on the iPad without propping up your legs, uncomfortably holding it in the air, or laying it in your lap and arching your neck.

It's because of all of that that I do not think the Surface is heavy. It's marginally heavier--at best--upon first grab, but you should rarely be holding it. You can if you want too, but most real world situations lead to positions that give the Surface the edge. I personally hate kickstands on phones, but I think that it was brilliant for Microsoft

Throw in the ability to add a microSD card and a USB hub, and I have been thrilled with the versatility of the Surface. Shy of development, I can replace my laptop usage with it entirely. I could never comfortably say that about the iPad.

The iPad's chip is definitely faster than the Tegra 3. I am frankly a little surprised at times when the Tegra 3 is choking, considering the amount of talk I had heard when it was being included in many other devices. Apple has clearly done a very good job in the SoC arena, and I do not know who will be able to take their crown within 2013--I suspect it won't be until 2014 until someone catches up. What I really miss most from the iPad, and Apple products in general, is their battery life. Being that Apple makes the entire product, including the chip, they clearly get the edge here, but they also have amazing batteries regardless of everything else. I hate the inability to replace them, but I have never actually seen a real case where someone needed to do it.

That's not to say that the Surface has low battery life (as I use it throughout the week with WiFi left on to get live tile updates, unlike my iPad, which I instinctively turn off considering I have to enter apps to get meaningful information anyway), but if it had Apple's battery savvy inside of it, then I cannot help but wonder how much longer it might last.

Finally, both the Surface and the iPad fall short on the camera, but I didn't exactly buy either one for a camera. The Surface's camera being intelligently angled has already come in handy once while talking with someone over Skype at the same as I was writing a very long email, and I split-screened the apps (IE and Skype) to be able to see the other person at the same time; that was awesome and very smooth.

It's relatively heavy and bulky for what it is.

Good on you for pointing out that the above poster was wrong, but your follow up can only be said by someone that has no idea what they are talking about. You should at least try to hide your ignorant bias.

First google image result for "ipad versus surface": http://gdeluxe.com/ipad-3-vs-surface-tech-specs/

The Surface RT is 0.1 mm thinner than the iPad 3 (the first "New iPad"), and the added weight is likely because its screen is 0.9 inches larger (10.6 compared to 9.7), which only adds up to 0.06 pounds more.

And, for what it is, it gives your more flexibility than an iPad. You can actually browse the file system. There's no question that both Android and iOS tablets have a much larger swath of apps currently available, but I have gotten far more use out of my Surface in the month that I have owned it compared to my iPad 2 for the entire time that I have owned it (a few months after its initial release). Add to that the free copy of Office that comes with Surface RT, and it's rather dubious to scoff clearly without any actual knowledge of the matter.

It is better to say nothing and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

This story is entirely about Microsoft's tablet...

Yep. Anything short of that is racist on either end of the spectrum. You're either claiming one race is superior, or claiming one race is inferior and thus it needs your support.

I don't really see how this isn't the obvious solution.

I thought there were whistle blower laws to shield people from these mishaps?

Is it because he went to the media rather than the FBI? I'm genuinely curious as the article doesn't say much except that he's a "hacker" that downloaded a bunch of public web addresses that were easily predictable.

That logic is unbreakable.

The threat of a filibuster is only necessary when your side doesn't have more votes. People can blame Republicans for it all they want, but it was Democrats that didn't vote for the Bill.

Not to mention the obvious by adding that it's a good thing that a Lame Duck session did not grant more power to one of the most incompetent bureaucracies in the US: the DHS. The last thing that anyone needs is the DHS knocking on every business' door while making inane requirements that protect nothing.

It would be analogous to how they oversee the TSA, which we all clearly believe makes us totally-super-duper safer.

Not to mention that the submission fails to note that Republicans cannot block anything in the Senate when done by a vote shy of a filibuster. They are the minority party in the Senate--both before and after the election--and anything that goes by party lines will always fall in favor of the Democrats in that case. Therefore, a 51-47 vote means that one person didn't even vote, and that some Democrats agreed with the Republicans that it was a bad bill.

Besides, anyone that thinks creating a new, major bureaucracy during the Lame Duck session is simply asking for trouble. And, furthermore, why Congress and the President are focusing on anything other than the looming tax increases and sequestration is beyond me, but the latest Slashdot poll made it clear that it will always be the Republican's fault. There's one month to left to do it; whether or not this bill had passed, nothing would have changed within that month anyway, which means that it could have waited until next year.

This Bill would have put the same people in charge of cybersecurity as are in charge of the TSA: the DHS. There's a winning group of government bureaucrats with a proven track record of incompetence. But, I suppose based on the rest of the poster's sentiments that the Republicans can likely be blamed for that as well (rather than the shocking reality that the DHS came about through the same issue proposed to break Congressional deadlock).

From the second-to-last paragraph, it sounds like they really had a chance to pull you into their ecosystem with Windows 8. I bet you gave a really serious shake too.

Pundits continue to weigh in on Steve Sinofsky's sudden exit from Microsoft (as executive head of Windows Division, he oversaw the development and release of Windows 7 and 8).

followed by

Few PC users are upgrading to Windows 8 with its unwanted Touch UI, sales of the Surface tablet are disappointing, and few are buying Windows Phones.

If the second statement is to be believed, then why should anyone be worried that the person behind it leaving the company?

Alternatively, if you choose not to believe the second statement (though WP sales being high is certainly hard to claim no matter how you look at it), then the first statement is scary for Microsoft.

I was personally a bit stunned by Steve's sudden departure, but considering that the people that supposedly came up with the most hated pieces of Windows 8 took over for him, I doubt much will change (love it or hate it).