The... Web?

I thought it was faster than Chrome.

But honestly the huge amount of features FF has that Chrome doesn't makes the choice clear.

Not true, plenty of reviewers (example: https://youtu.be/6TWbXV5xeYE) who have tested thermal throttling on their Macs. It turns out playing games in Windows pretty much guarantees thermal throttling on their laptops and if you think about it, it makes sense. Their brand new "fan" design is nothing more than marketing and the lower thermals are achieved because CPUs have gotten more efficient rather than the MacBook's cooling solution being better. After all, it's not like Apple came up with some revolutionary new fan blade that can magically push out more CFM somehow more silently than the previous models in a smaller form factor.

Apple's machines are not engineered for performance in the same way an Alienware laptop might (which, while bulky, also doesn't thermal throttle). Even the Razer Blade, a comparable machine to Apple's highest tier Macbook Pro, runs cooler on more powerful hardware while being only slightly thicker (and has USB type A ports).

It's not even like the MBP can justify that a slim form factor means it has to run hot, since the Gigabyte Aero can come with a Max-Q GTX 1070 and i7-7700HQ and run way cooler. It's simply not been engineered with thermals in mind. If anything thermals were an afterthought, or a thing that executives at Apple went, "Oh I guess if we /have/ to give it a fan..."

I know because I've tried to play games on them through bootcamp and it's garbage.

Good god no. Mac graphics cards (if it has anything more than integrated) and thermals are terrible.

You couldn't pick a worse price to performance laptop for gaming.

Joel has already written extensively about this. But this is just a BS article where some cost cutting executive thinks he can save tons of money by chopping off an entire department.

1) Developers are bad testers.
2) QA often has a high burn out rate.
3) Develops are 3-4x the price of a QA guy.

So if you enjoy a higher turnover rate for developers, paying more money to have someone do something someone could do for 1/4 the price, and still released buggy software, then sure.

I've played StarCraft competitively (note: not professionally) and follow the professional scene (yes there's still a pro scene). There's a special depth to Starcraft that other games lack.

Most of the ranks below top level are all about macro/micro mechanics. Macro (economy, building units, ensuring supply cap doesn't ever get hit) is easy for AI to do. Micro is more challenging but still a task that's better for computers than humans. Top level players are already so good at both of these that there's really only diminishing returns left for computers to gain an edge over them in. They're even so good as to know exactly if they'll win a fight between each unit; almost like they're subconsciously calculating the end game of any engagement automatically. You can even see them know exactly how many attacks it will take. It's freakishly superhuman.

They also have developed some sort of insane intuition. You can watch them play against each other and move units to locations or build defenses in places only seconds before they need them despite having zero knowledge of the impending threat (such as building turrets right when there's about to be a drop on your resource line). There's instances where the tactics become so deep that they manipulate "thinking ahead" to double or triple bluffs to create openings. To beat these players, you need to have a deep understanding of human motivations. Classic tricks such as hold position lurkers spell doom for computer opponents who need to understand where their enemy might be laying a trap for them, /if they have gone lurkers/. For all you know they're using stop lurkers to deceive you into thinking lurker/ling/hydra is their strategy, while they're in position to wipe out your workers with muta micro.

It's simply not a game where you can calculate the odds and win every game, because you lack sufficient information to calculate any meaningful conclusions.

A better idea than most think. Not only can your spinning contraption create gravity, but also create a protective Magnetic field around it.

That's because they're taught MatLab is the end all of everything you'll ever need. It's the closest thing to programming that they know and MatLab has just enough functionality to hobble along as a general purpose language (it might be turing complete?).

My degree is in actual software engineering from an engineering college.

Not only were the courses tougher than the CS program (with more math, more science), the focus on software is slightly different and more towards creating systems and solving problems using existing software rather than the actual solution. But that is the fantasy they sell. In reality you end up sitting in a chair writing the implementation eight hours a day (most of the time) out of school, even if you've been trained otherwise.

It does still rub me the wrong way when people say they're software engineers. It's like calling yourself a computer scientist because you know web programming and got a BA in Computer Science and write front-end code.

Linux has kernel panics too.

What do you think you are?

I mean, that's cute, but you're wrong. That CPU will crush the iPhone's new fancy processor in a way that isn't even a competition. You should really stop trusting Geekbench scores, as they intentionally take TDP out of the equation.

The i7 chip can go forever without really thermal throttling in most laptop setups, even under high stress. The iPhone sleeps the CPU in between clock cycles to intentionally let it cool down. Further, the iPhone is running highly optimized software with very specific limitations. It doesn't need to be good at general tasks in the same way the i7 does. Sure it can do cool 4k video stuff... With how many codecs? Yeah, that's what specific hardware gets you, very fast specific things.

It's a great phone processor, but any i7 is going to leave it in the dust in any respectable comparison that doesn't artificially alter benchmarks to make things seem better than they are.

They probably were just trying to get their HBO Now subscription to work.

I do all my work inside of a virtual environment anyway.

But I'm sick of python2 being around as long as it has. It needs to die and not be used anymore by anyone. But it is because people are afraid to leave it's relative safety.

Then you raise the cost of the class.