Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment What a disingenuous douchebag (Score 1) 47 47

He also pointed out that the Wi-Fi range of the hack would limit its real-world use. âoeItâ(TM)s highly unlikely when a hunter is on a ranch in Texas, or on the plains of the Serengeti in Africa, that thereâ(TM)s a Wi-Fi internet connection,â he says. âoeThe probability of someone hiding nearby in the bush in Tanzania are very low.â

High-gain directional antenna what what? They've got hills in Texas, too, little-known fact.

Comment Re:Thank you, early updaters (Score 1) 216 216

Obviously you are concerned about bloat ... which is why you seem to have the same machine as I do. You future proof yourself against bloat by over-building it up front. Worked well for my last machine, which lasted me 5+ years.

I think two cores is enough for most purposes, but since the Xbox 360 you really want at least four cores for PC gaming. My last machine originally had three cores (Phenom II X3 720) and later sprouted three more (Phenom II X6 1045T) and is now my dedicated Linux desktop system. It, too, has 8GB. Now that game consoles have eight cores, it is in theory a good idea to have eight cores. In practice, the new i5 is faster at running eight threads than my FX-8350, even though it only has four cores. I would have had to have purchased a more expensive motherboard to go with my more expensive processor, though. I do have to admit that the intel benchmarks tend to produce much better minimum frame rates than the AMD boards, though. It might be worth the money.

I have no intention of upgrading this machine to Windows 10 now, possibly not ever. But sure as hell not with that in-place update to what I consider an OS barely out of beta.

I would use the in-place upgrade, but only out of curiosity. I'd like to see if Microsoft has it any better figured out than before. But then I would go ahead and nuke it and do a fresh install anyway.

Comment Re:Thank you, early updaters (Score 1) 216 216

Or you could....you know.....install it on its own little partition....just a thought.

Thinking is what you aren't doing. Installing Windows 10 on your Windows 7 machine, assuming you are getting Windows 10 for free because you have a Windows 7 license, invalidates your Windows 7 license. Or as the saying goes, "You can't go home again."

Granted, I can dick around with activation hacks and keep running 7 in perpetuity, at least in theory. But I paid for Windows specifically so I wouldn't have to mess with any of that crap, and so that I could get Windows 10 for the same low, low price.

Comment Re:Thank you, early updaters (Score 1) 216 216

So what specs would qualify as "blisteringly fast." Discounting the graphics card, you can't get the specs of a machine a whole lot higher than what you have now.

Oh, yes you can. You can buy enterprise-class processors and have assloads of cores. And my cores came from AMD, you could get cores from intel. Of course, you would have to spend vastly more money, which is why I didn't do that. I bought as much machine as I could get for just a few hundred bucks. The MB and case are refurbs, the video card is just a 750 Ti (Might upgrade pretty soon though, nvidia is getting ready to drop another budget board) and the processor is the middle-of-the-road version.

Yes, you can add more RAM but going beyond 16 GB is only going to be helpful for a small selection of tasks.

Mostly you could have a faster processor, in the real world even the new i5 is faster than this 8350. And of course, you could have vastly more GPU. Mine was just around a hundred, you can spend as much as I spent on my whole system on graphics. Or, as I considered briefly, you could have a couple of processors, each with more cores. But I decided that 8 was enough, even if I virtualize a couple of dual-core machines I still have enough left to get by and if I want to feed more VMs than that, I need to spend a lot more on storage.

Comment Re:Mod Parent Up (Score 1) 90 90

Ha ha. I remember you arguing how Android was going to the platform for games because of Ouya.

Well, I do think I left in some weasel words about how they could screw it up, and how it might be some successor which would dominate on the same basis. But yeah, I bet on Ouya, and I was wrong. It does happen.

So it really was a shit as I sad it would be.

Yep.

Comment Re:Will this slow down the Internet? (Score 1) 216 216

Looks like Microsoft did their homework and put up a good delivery system.

I know a few game publishers who might want to take a couple notes.

If those game publishers were as big as Microsoft, had been around as long as Microsoft, and had as much experience failing at meeting demand for capacity as Microsoft, then by now they would have added the capacity... as Microsoft has. There's been lots of times in the past when their ability to deliver content has been poor, but that was mostly a long time ago. Now they're just demanding you use javascript on their site, which they only instituted fairly recently. That's piss-annoying.

Comment Re:Thank you, early updaters (Score 1) 216 216

Are there bugs? Yes of course. Was there a few hiccups in updating/installing? Of course. I don't expect this update to be flawless but I do expect a more receptive desktop with less bloat and clutter than Windows 8 and Windows 7.

My machine is by no means blisteringly fast and I built it for chump change but I've got 500GB of SSD, 16GB of RAM and eight cores. I give a shit about bloat. In principle, I care very much. In practice, it is not really affecting me any more.

Windows 7 is so very good I am afraid to leave it. It is not by any means perfect, but I enjoy it more than I ever thought I would enjoy a Microsoft operating system.

Comment Re:Thank you, early updaters (Score 1) 216 216

Hey. That's what VMs are for.

It's a nice idea, but running on the metal often exposes bugs which you don't see while running in a VM, usually driver-related. While my hardware is pretty boring now from this standpoint as it's quite new and not exotically expensive or inexpensive, I'm still not going to risk it. I wasn't just born on the turnip truck last thursday night.

Comment Re:NUC? (Score 1) 56 56

What incompetence led Intel to use a temporally relative name. It's on par with 'new' in the product name. Seems to work OK until it doesn't and looks idiotic in retrospect.

What looks idiotic in retrospect is your comment. The name only has to make sense long enough to sell a bunch of units. Then they're on to the next product.

Comment Re: And monkeys might .... (Score 1) 106 106

What a hopeless article. Yes, real quantum computing would be cool, and D-Wave has been doing quantum-y things with investor money for a decade or so, and scientists have developed improved more standard kinds of quantum computers to the point that they can now factor 21, surpassing the record of factoring 15 that held for a few years, and maybe sometime in the future quantum computers will be as far advanced beyond that as today's rockets are beyond the ones Goddard had on paper a century ago or his early flying models 90 years ago, or maybe not (or maybe both at once, because YOU CAN DO THAT with quantum.)

But like most articles about quantum stuff in the popular press, and 99.9999% of content about it in the New Age business, it follows the paradigm of

1. I don't understand quantum!
2. I can imagine really cool things that I don't understand how to make!
3. ????
4. PROFIT! , err, Therefore, quantum is how to make really cool things I want! QED!

Quantum physics isn't a Simple Matter Of Engineering like rocketry (and there are reasons for the phrase "Rocket Scientist" - rocketry's also more than just a S.M.o.E, no matter what you remember from those Heinlein stories you read as a kid about building spaceships in your back yard.) Mathematics and physics breakthroughs don't just happen because you really really want them to or because you pour lots of money into the engineering (though especially for the physics, that really helps.)

And yes, D-Wave might be on to something, or they might be pursuing a dead end, and we'd learn valuable things by helping them do either one, if they publish enough detail about their work, and maybe they can build quantumy computers that are useful for real-world problems even if you can't use them to run Shor's Algorithm to crack factoring-based crypto. But just because rocketry was at sort of a cusp a century ago, and lots of other technologies have gone from "not ready/usable yet" to "useful" that doesn't mean that quantum computing is one of them; lots of other technologies have gone from "not ready/usable yet" to "old obsolete dead ends."

Brain damage is all in your head. -- Karl Lehenbauer

Working...