What a dumb comment. It's not like DX11 is being left out of Win7 and Vista. Why don't you go start a petition to have DX11 support for DOS 6.22?

Intel has nothing to do with mobile technology moving faster than PC tech. I've got two laptops and a desktop, all with various numbers of cores, and various intel CPU's released in the past couple years. They all perform as well as I need them to. Sure, video transcoding is faster with 4 cores than with 2, but OSX/Windows 7 perform very well on any processor that's come out in the past, oh, let's say 3 years.

I can't say the same for phones. The phone I got two years ago doesn't compare to the phone I got this fall, which doesn't compare to whatever phone I'll be buying this year.

THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH INTELZ OMGZ>. If my phone could run VMWare and play Batman Arkham Asylum the same way my PC could, then I'm pretty sure we would see mobile progress slow down too. Seriously, what more do you want out of your desktops? How much more could we possibly expect from Intel/AMD/Apple/Microsoft/Linux?

That makes sense. It also makes sense that roughly 86% of users would enable a full scan every day.

I noticed this problem myself months ago. After a few days of uptime, the RAM would fill up by itself (not by me opening more and more programs... I would come home from work or wake up in the morning and my RAM usage had gone up considerably) and the machine would become quite slow once the RAM usage hit 85-90%. And this PC has 6GB of RAM, so that's not a trivial amount of memory usage. After fiddling for a couple weeks, I realized that the problem was caused by both AVG and Avast! Anti-Virus (not running at the same time... come on.) I installed Microsoft Security Essentials as my AV solution and the problem went away. I'm not saying it's not Microsoft's fault, but there IS an easy solution.

I'm really getting sick of the crap that kdawson posts.

This is complete and utter crap. For anyone to write/post that article, you would have to have zero understanding of memory addressing. Guess what. 2^32 = 4 294 967 296. That means that a 32-bit processor can only handle 4 billion memory addresses, or 4GB of RAM. Clearly software written for 32-bit processors are only going to be able to access the first 4GB. How would you tell software or an OS where to look for something in the 6th gig? OH OH I KNOW! You'd write 64-bit software.

kdawson, you are an idiot, and a detriment to this site. DIAF.

You know what still plays just fine? The Beatles records my mom bought in the 60s, and the DJ Jazzy Jeff + The Fresh Prince tapes I bought in the 80's. As long as DRM exists, I will continue to buy vinyl records, and pirate digital music when I can't find the vinyls.

I find it almost funny that the RIAA is desperately trying to cram the internet and digital music into the 1950's business model of the recording industry.

I have used a vast array of music production software, too many to list here, on Linux, Windows and Mac. While the open source software out there for Linux is respectable, and definitely usable, it's nowhere near the commercial products that exist for Windows and Mac. If music were my career, there's no fscking way I would use Linux. As a hobbyist, it suits me fine. Taking a Linux laptop on stage would be terrifying for me. I would sooner use a Windows solution than Linux. But then, if it's your career, you should really be putting more than $600 into it.

There's a big difference between "threat" and "competition." This is stupid.

Oh, and your signature's retarded. WTF is Vista 6? 0.1 more bugfixes? What does that even mean? The taskbar received the biggest overhaul I've seen since Windows 95. Up until Windows 7 came out, I was a die-hard OSX fan, but now I have to say I'm jumping ship; Windows 7 is the best OS I've ever used.

I for one applaud Microsoft's successful implementation of EEE. Maybe Corel should have made WordPerfect better.

Using words like "indefensible" don't mean you're right. It's not a black and white situation as you seem to be indicating here. "Indefensible" is a very closed-minded term on this topic, and I know I'm not going to convince you of anything other than your own viewpoint, but that won't stop me from sharing my two cents.

Maybe I missed something, but how exactly did Microsoft screw over PowerPC users? Apple switched from PowerPC to Intel. Therefore, PowerPC macs are not getting any better. They're the same machines they were 4 years ago. Why would Microsoft continue developing Office for these under-powered machines? I mean, even if Apple stayed with PowerPC, the latest and greatest software would still not run on an iBook G3 with 512MB of RAM. You want to run new software, buy a new computer, it really doesn't matter if the Mac is PowerPC or x86. If it's old, it's old.

As for ARM, I think trying to take over the desktop market is the worst idea they could have. They would deserve to be screwed over by M$. It's like all the Linux folk who complain that M$ is keeping them down. Well, Windows pretty much has the desktop market on lockdown. I'm not saying Windows should be the only desktop OS, but if linux has 1% market share, then your OSS OS is still being used, and be happy about it. People call Linux a failure because of this, but Linux seems to be a fair bit more successful in other areas. Cell phones, GPS devices, etc etc etc. M$ haters are starting to really bother me. Seriously, they're a company, and a successful one at that. I'm not saying everything they do is right, of course not. They fuck up plenty, as does Apple and Linux.

I guess I'm just agreeing with dhavleak; stop taking yourself so seriously, especially when it comes to one of the dumbest news articles I've seen in a while.

I know Apple calls it "OS X," but it's clearly not the same operating system. If that's your argument, then Windows also runs on ARM processors, and you've nullified the entire article. (IMO the article should never have been posted anyway, what a waste of time.)

It's not replacement, it's convergence. The past 20 years has brought the two technologies closer together. Replacement would mean that you'd take a Commodore 64 and put it where your TV used to be. But in the interest of convergence, yes, the internet's sped up, as have computers. Displays have become bigger and cheaper. Does anyone really think that doesn't tie into TV at all? I mean, 20 years ago, I'm pretty sure anyone with half a brain could've predicted the way things would've gone, and this is one of the most useless slashdot articles I've ever seen.

There's a Monty Python skit where they interview an old man with a ridiculously long German last name. I think the man dies while being interviewed because the interviewer has to take so long to say his name.

Just sayin', it probably affects this guy's time-effiency. I'm not voting for him.

jesus christ, this isn't a discussion on the best way to install drivers. people install drivers using methods other than apt-get. moreso in debian than ubuntu. this skews the data. that is all. f*ck.

ever tried it? it's not hard. make sure your kernel headers are installed, go to www.nvidia.com, download the driver (it's not running "some" installer, it's running the official Nvidia installer, just like Windows, which is a perfectly stable method) and then sh ./NVIDIA-1.xxxx.run

Done. I'm not saying that one method's better than the other, but this is the method I use, as I've had better luck with it, and it's the exact same method on any distro. Ubuntu's the only one I've used where I don't do this. So I'm just saying that the numbers reported on Debian users who use the nvidia module is severely undercut. Oh, and Linux is never good family fun.