blah blah blah shut the fuck up.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
But dang, MS, you could write a check and it'd be a fucking rounding error on your earnings last year...
It's bad enough you gotta bunch of guys out there who read too much goddamned Tom Clancy and use military/police-esque terms for everything whilst wearing their size XXXXXL tactical camo pants, but do we really want to start throwing around terms like OPSEC? Goodie, you know a new term/acronym; you're still not a badass.
> It's a machine before the TCP/IP and Internet times.
I ran a machine like that with TCP/IP on the Internet. The main problem would be getting an ethernet port working on the thing but the software side of the equation is well covered.
Been there. Did that.
Of course, the dream would be able to 3D print chocolate/sugar sculptures, but I've been seriously considering how feasible it would be to create custom chocolate/sugar molds to create things like eggs, etc that go beyond what we can get from the usual suppliers and without having to fork out a few grand for a one-off custom design elsewhere. A couple paying jobs and I imagine a 3D printer would pay for itself for this particular aspect of my interests.
Meanwhile, there is this PC platform that wiped out all of it's other bespoke competitors probably before you even touched your first computer. PCs are MUCH more diverse than Android phones. But if you started whining about "fragmentation" to PC developers they would look at you like you grew a second head.
I can think of a zillion loopholes by which this will be evaded.
Is there a definition of what is THE internet? surely comcast can create a parallel construction and sell however they wish like a private toll road. It could have discrete points where it could tap into the "real" internet. Thus amazon or netflix or whomever could connect into this autobahn on the goes-into side and pop out into "the" internet at some Comcast hub in the customers town.
Picture it like FED Ex, transporting a package 90% of the way, then mailing it. the postoffice might not charge differently for different customers and Fed Ex might not either (or they could) but only customers with valuable deliveries would be willing to pay the cost of the combined service, which would be dominated by the Fed Ex high speed service.
That's effectively what companies like Akamai sell already and those are not part of the discussion of Net Neutrality.
It might be easy to regulate comcast if comcast is the parent company of both halves of this real and shadow internet. But if these services are split into two companies then what? Even if the shadow company is privately held by comcast this is going to be hard to regulate.
Eventually the shadow compaines won't even bother with their own hardware. They will lease a certain number of dedicated switches from Comcast for their own uses. these will be cut out of the real internet.
An alternative way around this is by selectively enforcing the tragedy of the commons. In principle Netflix could prioritize its packets on a neutral interenet by emitting 100 times as many packets where each packet is sent 100 times. the receiver ignores all but the first one of the redundant packets. This of course would be retaliated by others now squeezed out doing the same thing resulting in 100x the traffic for the same data and no gain for anyone. COmcast would come down hard on these miscreants but would it be selective?
What do "desktop users" even want? Do they even have any real desires or do they just mindlessly take whatever is force fed to them by a Microsoft dominated OEM channel?
These are the same "desktop users" that turned their noses up at MacOS in favor of DOS.
The idea that Linux "lost the desktop" is assinine. It was never there to take. It was owned by DOS from day one. Quality of the product accounts for ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.
By Lemming-centric market metrics, even MacOS is a failure.
Thankfully most other markets are not quite as broken and I am not stuck eating dirt. Only in the computing market is the notion of not wanting to eat dirt seen as extreme or subversive.
...in a VM perhaps.
Go beyond that and Windows is a royal pain to get up and running. It's actually far more problematic to get up and running than Linux is.
It's hard to see this if you've never actually installed a proper copy of Windows on bare metal.
This Linux gaming renaissance is most likely a side effect of how every other gaming platform besides Windows uses "something else". That something else is Linux compatible. That reduces the distance between Linux and what has already been ported to.
Android, MacOS, even the PS4 and Wii's are intermediate steps towards Linux.
It's no great surprise that the most interesting ports for Linux are being done by a MacOS porting house.
Beyond the big titles, Linux is a significant part of the market. The indies were already porting to Linux because of this.
Because we gotta make that paper, bitches.
While the NUCs are overkill for HTPC duty, the PIs are also not sufficiently there either. A PI just has problems keeping up with the user interface (XBMC).
Something like a Chromebox is the sweet spot. Decent enough GPU for video decoding and a CPU that's not ridiculously anemic.
You mean that Canadians have a nasty spending cap and get turned down for treatments that Americans take for granted? That kind of cheap?
Don't swim in the kool-aid.