"The important question is; which is a better game play platform and which has the best games?"
"The important question is; which is a better game play platform and which has the best games?"
"completing the Windows XP --> Windows 7 transition. Big organizations move slowly... "
There it is in a nutshell. Munich was on NT4 when they started this and while XP was out, they decided they didn't want to go that route because they could see that they would just become more and more tied to Microsoft.
Fast forward ten years and they're on their own Linux distro with upgrades in their own time. No being forced to move from a platform that is well understood and works well (XP) to a different platform that has compatibility problems with software developed for earlier versions (7) just because the vendor (MS) doesn't want to support XP any more.
This is a bit of a watershed. Many thought Munich was mad doing this and MS clearly hated it and wanted them to fail but they haven't failed and more to the point they've taken control of their environment in a way that MS only shops would never be able to. I've got to wonder how many sites are going to be going through a world of pain getting off XP while staying in the MS fold when they could move away entirely and save themselves the trouble in future?
"Are they providing a sensible version of GNOME? I very want to shuck Ubuntu, and this would let me have my Steam games *and* a usable desktop system."
This isn't the Linux you're looking for. This is stripped down and intended to run Steam in Big Picture mode all the time. No desktop at all. The standard Steam client on a Linux system is what you're looking for.
Personally, I shy away from the bleeding edge Linux systems and stick with CentOS.
"Science hasn't "disproven" the existence of *any* supernatural being, just as it hasn't "proven" the existence either."
It isn't up to science to disprove the existence of god or whatever you want to call it. As Sagan so eloquently put it "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" and religion doesn't like to produce evidence.
On other hand though, when you look at how many gods mankind has believed in over the millennia (approximately 3000) the odds that the one particular god currently favoured is the right one is pretty darn small so as far as disproving it, no you're right, the particular favourite god of the moment (and this will change as it always does) may not be disproven, but it in no way stands out any more than all these other gods ever did and as such the probability that this god is any more real than any of the others is very tiny indeed. I certainly wouldn't go betting my life on being right about which one to pick.
Hmmm, mod points or comment..... Oh well.
"The answer is: No...
As I see it, the Steam eco-system will be no different than the current consoles (XBox, PS4). The Steam boxes will have the advantage over the consoles of higher-end graphics, game controllers, etc. Windows boxes not only support higher-end gaming but also a wide variety of applications. A gaming rig can, and usually is, also used for gaming, photo editing, finances, and many other applications. Much like tablets, it's all about the apps...
Don't get me wrong, I'm happy to see the expansion of gaming. However, Steam is not the savior of the Linux desktop. In my opinion, It will be just another console..."
At some point the market will decide there are too many choices. This happened back in the 1980s when there were loads of different types of home computer and eventually they got thinned out through the 90's until Windows PCs were basically it. Valve is likely to turn console gaming on its head if they can get a sufficiently console like experience in place (Big Picture is close but enough games don't work with it that I still have to keep a keyboard and mouse close at hand) and enough AAA games come to it. Certainly, the market is saturated with PS4/XBone and then SteamBox and of the three I wish the SteamBox most success because it already has a massive game library compared to the other two, plus you can upgrade your hardware and keep your games. That's a killer improvement.
As for Windows, the main reason people use it is applications. When I talk to people about why they don't use Linux or Mac on the desktop there are largely viable replacements for the apps they use (especially true with the Mac) but games always come up as the main reason. Take that away and Windows is severely weakened in the market. Sure, it will hang on for a long time especially in corporate environments but these days home users have very little need for a PC when a tablet can do their social communications and a games console can do the gaming. I have a Mac and a PC (Win 7) at home and I barely use either because I have to actually go over and sit in front of them. Sure, I use my work Mac in the office all day but in my off time I don't want to sit at a desk. Steam on any computer is OK but it still can't be totally driven without a keyboard and mouse so maybe Valve's new controller can fix that (I hope so) in which case I'll leave my Windows box in Big Picture mode all the time and enjoy my games from the couch in full 1080p or more when I next upgrade and I won't lose my library. With SteamOS taking on more of the games I already own, a wipe to that is in the future for my PC and I'll keep the Mac for the boring stuff like work.
MS is desperately trying to remain relevant but they're bouncing around taking shots at everyone in sight because all these little devices are pulling the eyes away from their platform. Windows 8 has done little to improve things because it looks and works so badly unless you tweak the hell out of it with Classic Shell to get rid of the nightmare modern interface and restore it to something that looks and behaves more like Windows used to.
Sitting here at my Mac I have VMs for many different Linux distros, various versions of Windows too but I run OS X because I can run everything on it either native or via some form of emulation. Games aren't really the Mac's forte but that's OK as I don't want to sit in front of a keyboard to play games and I want a viable replacement for my current Xbox 360 (which I dislike more with every update) and MS just burned the Xbox platform by releasing the One without any backwards compatibility. Similarly, Sony's PS4 has no library and the price of games have gone up another 15-20% over the already outrageous prices so no sale there either as I can't pick up cheap back catalogue stuff to fill out the collection. Pity, I had hoped to play many of the PS3 exclusives and as it stands I'll likely buy a PS3 cheap at some point soonish to do that. I also just bought a WiiU because Nintendo is still innovating and it plays my current Wii games so we already have stuff to play along with the couple of WiiU games we got and you can pop them off the TV onto the controller screen. That's cool. PS4 and Xbox One? No back catalogue, expensive games, sub-PC graphics and all that lovely DRM. Nope, don't think so.
I went from a 2006 model MacBook Pro which I had done all the upgrades on maxing the RAM and putting a 300GB drive in (big for the time I did it) and it is still running. The thing is, while I appreciated that I could upgrade it, it turns out when time came for a new machine I looked at the specs for the i5 MacBook Air and it left my 2006 MBP for dead. I figured, sure, I may not get the 5 years of working life I did out of the Air but it was less than half the price, way lighter, same screen resolution (1440x900) with a better trackpad, way better battery life and an SSD that made it so fast it was nuts. Here I am, two years in and the thing hasn't put a foot wrong. Battery is holding up nicely at just shy of 90% capacity after nearly 200 recharges whereas my old MBP had chewed through 400 recharges by two years and the battery was stuffed and needed replacing (the benefits of twice the run time I guess.)
Anyway, these days I look at the pros and figure I can't be bothered. I can hang all the stuff I want off this machine and the 4GB of RAM isn't terrible, especially now that Mavericks implements memory compression. Very glad I stumped up for the 256GB SSD and the i5 has proven a very good little workhorse. I have a big PC at home that I use for the heavier compute work and also a Mac mini which is my preferred desktop computer but the MBA is what I use 90% of the time. I wouldn't trade the small and light form factor even for a retina Pro. We have one in the office and it is heavier by far and while the screen is nice it behaves like 1280x800 so appears to have less real-estate.
I'll easily get another couple of years out of this machine and then I'll go straight back and buy another with the latest specs. The benefits of the largely solid state design, light weight and the wonderful keyboard and trackpad more than make up for any losses. Oh, and the screen, while not matte, doesn't have a glass cover so is actually very nice with the antiglare finish.
Get a fire safe. Put your backups inside. Probably safer than having them in your neighbour's house as anything that could happen to yours could also engulf theirs. Get two drives so you can have one attached and the other in the safe. That's what we do at work as well as having drives go off site. Can't have too many backups. Of course, it does require some work but you can't really get away without some effort. Heck, if you have a basement you could locate your drives down there. Anything short of a meteor strike should be protected against assuming you're also protecting against water.
I've followed this and other projects for a while and the quality of the sets, costumes and SFX are right up there. Sadly, the acting is poor at best. I hate to single anyone in particular out but the main three characters really don't work. It isn't just that they are different people, it is just bad acting. I actually haven't had such a problem with the Abrahms reboots despite there being new actors because the standard has been decent so it isn't that. Of course, when you get the odd trek alumni in these then they stand out as being more comfortable in the roles. Now, if we can get CGI up to a standard where we can produce lifelike replications of the original actors then we're really talking about being able to continue the series.
'I'm assuming what he meant was, "New Zealand doesn't have a large enough software industry for them to have enough lobbying dollars to write the laws."'
Again, I disagree. We have a solid high tech industry and there was quite a lot of lobbying around software patents. I just think the OP was being arrogant in assuming that NZ has no software industry when actually we have some significant output and the country doesn't just rely on dairy. The software patentability thing was hard fought and a victory for common sense.
"Well to be fair, New Zealand doesn't have a software industry."
It most certainly does. I've worked for a successful NZ software company for years now and we're doing very well with customers globally using our well regarded software. You don't have to look far to find there is a lot of software development going on in NZ and companies based around it. Heck, you might even have heard of a small company called 'Weta' that did the CGI for some fairly popular films.
"I've driven in the U.K. before. You don't have as many people dying because it's rare to have a chance to be going fast enough that anyone can die in an accident. Mostly you are sitting still in L.A. quality traffic jams, until you get out into way open areas."
Bullshit - have you driven all over the UK for an extended period of time? I have. I live in NZ but used to live in the UK and I can tell you that NZ drivers are shockingly bad compared to those in the UK. UK drivers know how to use their mirrors, they don't tend to tailgate and they don't run red lights by and large. Sure, there are some arseholes on the road as there always is but the majority of UK drivers are well trained and observant, plus the cars are kept to a decently high standard due to the strict MOT that they have to undergo each year, Compulsory insurance also helps keep the idiots off the road.
The driving test in the UK is difficult by comparison with the one in NZ and that is why it isn't surprising to see 3x as many deaths per 100,000 in NZ as in the UK. Cars here are wrecks, insurance is optional so it isn't uncommon to have hit and run incidents as I experienced last year (I now ride my motorcycle with a helmet mounted camera to give me a chance of getting their plate and model of car) and many drivers don't even have full licenses and yet learners are allowed on all roads including motorways (although learners are supposed to do no more than 70Kph.) The highest speed limit anywhere, even motorways, is 100Kph (62Mph) and even that seems too fast for some drivers who don't understand lane discipline, stopping distances or driving to the conditions (speeding in fog and pouring rain? Check. Speeding is endemic) whereas in the UK you can be tooling along at 70Mph on a good quality motorway in very heavy traffic and still the accident rates are low. Here I'm lucky to go a week without seeing a major accident on my daily commute. I've seen more accidents here in 6 years than I saw in 25 years driving in the UK.
Sure, there are areas in the UK you don't want to drive - the M25 is a parking lot much of the time - but get outside the home counties and there are lots of decent roads and not that many traffic jams. Driving in a city is a mugs game anyway and one of the things that drove me onto a motorcycle was the fact I can get to work 3x quicker by bike (35 mins) than I can by car. The UK has more bikers which is indicated by the higher road accident percentage and it is a sad fact of life that if you aren't car shaped you're largely invisible.
NZ has a strange mix of drivers from countries that have interesting rules too - we have Indian drivers who subscribe to the might is right rule so a bike better get out of the way of a car which better get out of the way of a truck regardless of who has right of way. Throw in lots of Chinese drivers who haven't enough road experience and then a bunch of holiday makers from the US and it gets pretty interesting.
Too used to having to put the conversions in so USians understand.
"If you're from one of the countries that uses the L/100km measure (Germany, Italy, Australia, etc.), then this prototype uses about 0.90 L/100km."
We use that conversion here (New Zealand) and it makes a whole lot more sense since I can see precisely how much less fuel this will use compared with my current car which gets around 9L/100Km. Basically, this goes 10x further per gallon than a typical family wagon. Impressive. More so because it is dragging a car around and my 650cc motorcycle only gets 4L/100Km which I thought was pretty good. I did have a 100cc scooter at one point which managed about 2.5L/100Km.
Trying to relate all of this with mpg or even lpk is much harder.
iPad vs XBone huh? OK, how about a usable web browser that isn't tied to a subscription. Email and calendar clients plus other useful apps. Then there's the App Store where many apps a d games are free and others often cost about a buck. Compare that with the XBone which requires a live subscription to access services you've already paid for (Netflix) or just to use the web browser. Chock full of adverts and a UI that is an appalling piece of crap that has already been rejected (Metro) and games (the main purpose of the system in theory) which cost so much it is beyond stupid and you can't even guarantee that you'll be able to trade them. The reason Steam is acceptable is because the games cost far less a d are tied to your account so they move between machines as long as you've logged in. iPad apps are so cheap the device is useful far beyond the initial cost and again the apps move around. I have two iPads and an iPhone and the apps I purchase are available on all of them. The XBone takes way too many freedoms away at too high a cost.
So, when do they start making a car that I can afford to drive?"
You can afford to drive it - the cost of electricity per mile is far lower than the cost of petrol for the same distance. Your problem is you can't afford to *BUY* it. The good news is, those who can afford it are allowing the cost to come down as a result of mass production so the early adopters with deep pockets are subsidising the eventual more affordable versions for the rest of us.
My main problem with electric cars isn't the fuelling (yada yada, moving the pollution etc) but rather the guy in front. Queuing in a traffic jam is still a massive waste of time regardless of means of propulsion. Electric cars don't fix this. You need to get out of the whole concept of everyone having their own personal box on wheels and find more efficient means of moving people from A to B. The car isn't it and is a victim of its own success.
Have you ever noticed that the people who are always trying to tell you `there's a time for work and a time for play' never find the time for play?