1528 posts • joined Monday 26th January 2009 18:23 GMT
Go to Trafalgar Square. Look up.
It seems like the problem here was that the equipment doesn't exist in sufficient numbers in the right locations with the appropriate level of tech. As an island nation, it seems a bit obvious (as it always has) that sea power should be the key. Yes you want to project force outward so that you take the fight to the enemy and keep it away from the home territory. In that respect, carrier focused air power seems to make a lot more sense.
It also has the advantage of being mobile.
Lack of mobility in large numbers seems to be the real problem. That's something that a plenty of helicopters and mobile airfields help with.
Heavy tanks? Defense? Is someone really expecting the next great tank battle to be in Britain?
Ignoring inconvenient facts...
> ... could I ask why the UK felt the need
> to launch an unprovoked aggressive
> war against a nation
You might want to ask the Arab League about that since they actually asked for it. You are overlooking the UN resolution too. At the very least, the other major powers gave their implicit approval for this.
This is not the usual unilateral nonsense.
Your moral indignation would come off better if you weren't a liar.
The un-unix-ness of MacOS.
> the purpose of what iPhoto brings: the idea
> that photos are not just bland "files," but
> objects with inherently special and unique
You get that with just a better Finder.
You don't need a special tool for each type of file to achieve that.
In fact you are far better off if such a tool is a more generalized system utility or even better something that can easily be scripted/automated.
iPhoto mainly makes it harder to be organized.
Hate to say this but...
> What does a windows box do that a Mac doesn't?
Macs are poorly equipped to deal with creative end users.
Apple tools are fine so long as you rigidly conform to what the system developers think is a good way to do things. Once you get beyond that, the "great Apple experience" kind of falls apart. It's more about the "we know what's good for you" mentality of Apple than anything else.
It's almost like Windows in that respect.
It's a much more bearable system if you ignore as much of the vendor supplied stuff as possible. Although in this case it is features and flexibility rather than crashes and malware.
It's best if you don't stray off the reservation.
State of Confusion.
> And yet, almost everyone including
> The Register make fun of Intel when
> they try to change their instruction set
> to something fresh and better like Itanium.
You are confusing "new" or "different' or "not x86" with "better".
They are by no means the same thing. If anything proves that it's Itanium.
HDMI Audio on Linux
HDMI Audio on Linux is driven by the driver version level. Oddly enough, this is much like how it would be under Windows. The ION1 gear should be fine with whatever the current version of Ubuntu comes with. ION2 may require an upgrade to a newer version of the audio drivers (namely ALSA).
Once your driver version is sorted out, you just need to let the system know what audio output you want to use.
Aim at foot and then fire.
> That was in reference to Ubuntu not working, not Windows.
That's nonsense. Ubuntu and Nvidia works quite well with strange HDTV monitors.
Perhaps someone is willfully avoiding the proprietary driver. As someone that has used a number of these ION systems, that's the only way I can imagine the GPU not playing nice with the TV.
Apple reality distortion field.
> What about that nail-biting wait
> after making anything - if the
> customer doesn't approve of it.
> You have a very blinkered view,
> and too chancy will never get you
...Apple fanboys are so funny.
Apple Corp IS NOT THE CUSTOMER. You are. Apple Corp is nothing but a bridge troll taking a cut and possibly preventing you from SELLING YOUR PRODUCT AT ALL.
With the old WinDOS model, no one prevents you from selling your product. You can sell it at Amazon or Best Buy or from your own custom web store and you don't have to ask anyone else's permission. Microsoft doesn't get to say a word about the situation.
What is this? Amateur hour?
> 32-bit systems (by the very nature of using
> 32-bit addresses) can only access 4GB max
My 32-bit Ubuntu system happily takes advantage of 8G.
64bit vs 32bit is always one of those things that cause support issues because absolutely everyone has to be on board with it or you run into trouble. It might not be a lot of trouble but it will likely be as inconvenient as possible.
XP has an excuse for being limited (age). Win7 does not.
You should follow your own advice.
> I'm glad you like ubuntu, but please be quiet while
> the grown ups are trying to have a discussion eh?
Your house is made of glass.
Business users will be dominated by concerns of obscure 3rd party apps. They will be fixated on vendor support. Therefore, the single most important factor here is what your app vendor supports. It doesn't matter if it's a $50 copy of WinDOS or a 60K copy of Oracle's clustered database. "it's the apps stupid"
That said, I know small business users that found Office 2007 and Vista annoying enough that they considered defecting from Microsoft entirely. It was those obscure 3rd party apps (the sort you've likely never ever heard of) that kept them from doing so. When it comes to any upgrade, you have to first consider what your applications support and then whether or not you want to potentially break everything by adding new variables (changes) to the environment.
Age differences past adolescence...
> but XP just wasn't designed to run on modern hardware
This is just hilarious.
The hardware that XP was shipped with 10 years ago is much the same as hardware it was shipped with recently or even hardware that's shipping now. Not that much has changed in the intervening time. Machines are much the same on the lowend. Even machines on the high end are not that different fundementally.
Multiple cores, MMX/SSE, 64-bit, large memory, 3D acceleration, video playback acceleration?
What exactly did you have in mind that's in XP-hardware that isn't in Win7-hardware?
It's a WEB BROWSER we're talking about here, not Crysis.
It's not like the beginning of the 90s versus the end of the 90s.
It's rude to not share your drugs.
Of course its a "new revelation" that new software won't install on older machines.
Although "older machines" in this case a LAST YEARS MACHINES.
Talk about swimming in the cool-aid. This would be like Snow Leopard or iLife 09 being uninstallable on my first generation nvidia based Mini or one of the i945 based ones.
Steve is just the messenger, not the executioner
> Apple killed the album as we know it.
No. A&R men killed the album.
Although it wasn't terribly lively even before then. Music has been sold as singles for pretty much the entire history of recorded music. This idea that the album is somehow sacred is just total historical revisionists nonsense. Very few bands ever bothered to compose albums as such. Even fewer did it well.
The grandparents of the iTunes generation were buy music as 45rpm vinyl singles.
...and the point is what exactly?
> Morons are the mindless haters, blinded by their bitterness.
Not one person has mentioned one thing that the new iPad can do
that the old one already doesn't do. Sure there's been plenty of hype
about artificial benchmarks that may or may not pan out. However, no
one has really adequately explained what they plan to get out of trading
one overpriced toy for another or what the urgency is.
Trying to avoid the truth...
This exploit runs under whatever priveledges your user has just like any other Trojan. While it's nice that the core system is not infected, you still have the problem that your own data could be toast or that you could be hosting all sorts of illegal content.
Not running as root does not "solve" this problem.
A Safari equivalent of NoScript might however.
Tweaking the basic install...
> Surely the first thing to get rid of if you want
> a fast machine is the *animated wallpaper*.
When I got another ION to replace my nv9400 Mini that appears to be on
death's door, I had to turn off all of the desktop effects in Win7 before XBMC
would start with anything but a "blank screen of death". It was one of those
"bare" machines. So I was already using an OEM version of Win7 to begin
Journalism: Perhaps you've heard of it.
> Heaven forbid you should follow any of the
> links to actually do your own research, as
> opposed to expecting all the detail to be
> spoon fed to you.
Of course that's what we expect.
Journalism: Perhaps you've heard of it. This is exactly what it is for... what you call "spoon feeding".
Integration of a deviant device.
> In my experience most mac users still
> believe the problems windows had
> over 10 years ago still exist; just like
> apple haters still think they only have
> one mouse button.
In an environment that is crushingly oppressive, just what use are you going to get out of a deviant pointing device? Just what is that extra button going to get you? It's not really standard and not part of the standard system dogma.
It's like any other bolt-on change.
...not even for extra light gaming.
> Hint: It's not sold as a gaming rig! )
> Selling quality hardware and O/S that will still be perfectly usable in 5 years: check
So you're not planning on ever playing a modern strategy or RTS game, eh?
That's the problem with certain types of "trailing edge" hardware. It's not that you have to worry about not being able to play Crysis or the other high horsepower flavor of the month. With a moderately out of date Mac you have to worry about being able to play ANYTHING that comes from a major studio.
With that in mind, any sh*tbox tower has a remarkable edge.
...and "turbo charged" means that I don't have to wait forever for iTunes or Handbrake to downscale something.
Inherently restricted device
> So, just because the Apple App Store's Terms and Conditions
> may (or may not; it hasn't been formally tested in court) be
> "compatible", it does not mean ALL "Open Source" or "Free
> Software" is thus incompatible.
Yes it does. Part of the definition of "Free Software" includes being able to do things with the source and binaries that Apple doesn't allow. THAT is one of the reasons that the VLC developer in question threw the hissy fit that he did.
"Free Software" is a term invented by RMS and the GNU tools are actually quite old. They predate Linux by a good long while and were even available on the ST and the Amiga.
Apple replaces Microsoft replaces Edison
> As with Linux, so with most of the rest of
> open-source software in general: it's only
> "free" if your time has no value.
That's funny because a lot of us Linux users were using this "App Store" approach to installing software LONG before Apple decided to copy it.
You should find some newer FUD.
That line wasn't even really accurate even when it was first uttered.
Spin spin spin...
> ...when you have a product that comes from nowhere
It's an overpriced iPod.
It didn't just "come from nowhere". It's the culmination of Apple's entire non-computer product lines.
"specs" are what allows "functions" to work.
Review missing a few things...
...like concentrating on the HTPC features that this thing is being sold for apparently. That includes MCE, XBMC, Hulu, Netflix and BluRay playback from that drive that was in the demo unit.
This seems like a nice cheap step up from a Boxee box. Although it's hard to tell.
The review was rather incomplete.
It's not clear the overall score was justified (or not).
It might not be a spectacular gaming machine but it at least has a GPU that's likely to be at least supported. This can be a a bit of a problem on low profile integrated boxes such as this.
Been there, done that.
> Unless optical gets as cheap as a kilometre of cat
> 5/6 and a dozen sockets, is as easy to wire-up,
> there's going to be resistance to adoption
I have fibre in my house because I used bundled cable. It was much cheaper than dealing with individual cables because my home builder charged by the drop and their pricing for labor made the cost of materials insignificant.
ANY sort of cable retro-fit is going to be an expensive mess. It doesn't matter what kind of cable it is.
Expensive monster cables.
> Cost is a non-issue as a long video cable
> means I don't need a pc under the telly.
Of course cost is an issue. The cost of the cable and the ports to plug it into on either end might be more expensive than the PC you would plug it into.
There is also the tricky issue of getting a cable from point A to point B. Most people have a problem with this. That's why wireless networking is so popular.
Although you can already do "video distribution" of the sort you're talking about with existing cable technology. The big problem (as I said before) is running the cable.
Don't confuse your ins and outs.
> I have SPDIF ports on the following items at home:
Yeah, but is that an input or an output?
My latest TV has an SPDIF port but it's only an output
intended to route whatever has been sent to the TV to
an external sound system. If you happen to have an
SPDIF cable on your device (like a PC), then it's pretty
Sound over HDMI is probably the expectation for
consumer electronics these days.
> PlayStation 2
> Pioneer DVD player
> Sky+ box
Aren't these all dinosaurs waiting for the extinction event?
Are you sure you actually meant PSX2?
That's positively pre-cambrian.
Your argument isn't what you think it is.
> and are sticking with 2003", presumably because of the
> ribbon bar which is you know - just "menus and stuff".
Except the ribbon isn't just "menus and stuff".
It's an intentional dramatic departure from what people are used to.
It's like WindowMaker or the way Macs deal with Menus.
Fewer devices to lug around, not more.
When I buy another Android device it will be because it does all of those things that an iPad does not do. I will buy it to avoid the annoyance factor of Apple's tablet, not so I can get some "cheap apple clone".
The joys of monopoly
> And also watch a movie on my way home that I
> bought legally instead of some divx knock off.
Here goes the "piracy accusation".
Unless you only buy through the platform monopolist, ANY movie you have on the iThing is going to look like some "divx knock off".
The problem with "apps" on a tablet is that you are stuck with the tablet interface. This is especially true for a closed platform like PhoneOS. That is where more PC-like tablets can have a considerable advantage.
Bandwidth? This is 2011 already.
> A device may be capable of downloading
> 5 gigabytes of data in hours or less on mobile
> service, but why would you do that?
What? You don't have Amazon streaming over there?
It's not really that hard to exceed a mobile bandwidth cap even without using your mobile device as a telly. Some mobile devices have a nasty habit of just plain being "chatty", even without someone "at the console".
Yeah. Like... advertise.
> Let me guess, don't tell me: it's all a problem with marketing
Well... Are there any Archos stores?
How about Super Bowl Ads?
Regular TV commercials?
Apple is famous for it's advertising.
We can only judge what was actually said.
> The interoperability claims could be the result
> of not being able to get working clients for...
Which is all well and good but it was not cited by the Lemming in question.
Sure, there are valid excuses for some arbitrary sort of business needing to stick with Windows (and not being able to use MacOS either). However, no such reasons were cited. No, the sort of nonsense that was cited sounded like nonsense from a 90s usenet troll post.
For some jobs I could cite software you never even heard of as a reason for being stuck with Windows.
That's the different between this Zealot and that Lemming.
Democracy and operating systems...
> OpenOffice is *still* not as good as Office. The Linux
> desktop is more confusing than the Windows one.
No it isn't. They are effectively the same. They use similar ideas in a similar way.
People that aren't old and brand fixated have no problems moving between any modern OS.
Just wait until those people get subject to ribbon.
The 80s is calling.
> I think alot of people here who post here
> championing Linux has the best thing since
> sliced bread and that everyone should move
> from Windows to Linux don't live in the real
> world where people
...where people mostly interact with their web browser anymore.
This is not exactly rocket science or sci-fi matte paintings we're talking about here.
Been there, done that.
I already have what could be viewed as an "Apple knockoff" that's not exactly cheap. I bought it because I care about the missing features it offers that Apple has chosen to ignore. It's not just about being an Apple knockoff or being cheap. It's about getting what I actually want.
The fanboys are going to try to cast you as some sort of knockoff whatever you do.
Make stuff that's useful, more useful than Apple gear.
...as far as cost goes: real PCs are expensive as tablets. That's why Apple got a lot of mileage out of their approach. They could get away with being cheap. "Being cheap" might not be the best option for everyone.
It's interesting how the tables turn sometimes.
A new brand of fanboy has just come to town...
>> "Who needs google?"
> Because you've already made yourself irrelevant to the discussion.
Not at all. He's clearly a naysayer. That doesn't make him irrelevant, especially if he makes technology decisions or recommendations for anyone else.
We've heard all of this inevitability rhetoric before and many of us are not impressed by it.
Revenge of the 90s.
> Any reason why that "might not have the moxi" for what he wants to do? I can't think of one.
How about: it's not really designed or intended to.
That's the key point with the boxee box. It is specifically intended to handle whatever you may have. The AppleTV and related products are designed with a very narrow set of functionality in mind. That means limited format support, limited codec support, a weak CPU and a weak GPU.
Trying to "brute force" anything not explicitly accelerated by the GPU hardware will likely be a losing proposition.
You're trying to turn some throwback from the 90s into something it's probably not.
It's really quite similar to the situation you would have doing the same thing with an ION nettop.
Except the ION box has a better CPU and GPU.
Gotta make excuses for Cupertino...
> Why do they all think that a 16:9 ratio is suitable for anything other than a TV?!?
Actually, it works just dandy for a normal desktop, even web browsing. I don't know how anyone could go back to 4:3 considering that standard paper sizes are much closer to 16:9.
Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth they actually had such "titled widescreen" monitors sold as "full screen" monitors.
What do I think?
I think this is precisely the sort of crap that caused me to dump Tivo for MythTV.
Users are charged a pretty penny for guide data. The least they could do is allow older devices to keep on using it. It's not like they were ever giving this stuff out for free or even at a reasonable cost.
Actually, this sort of thing is a brilliant idea. It's already done on MacOS with stuff you download from some place other than the App Store. This would be a good way to guard against malware. Clearly, iBooks is trying to play the part of Trojan. It should be treated accordingly.
Simply matter of choice...
This all boils down to a simple matter of choice and whether or not the platform places any value in the ability of the end user to choose for themselves or control their own experience. The issue isn't whether or not Flash is any good but whether or not anyone else has any business deciding this point for us.
I should be able to decide this for myself, not some self-appointed dictator.
Screeching from the rectory.
> OS X flash performance was not due to a lack of the
> APIs, it's due to a lack of Adobe CALLING THEM.
Nope. It was due to lack of the proper low level APIs like Windows and Linux both had available before Apple did.
Once Apple finally got around to releasing a somewhat comparable interface, Adobe adopted it.
Who reallly is last to the party?
> I suspect that Flash on android is doing more in
> software than it should and probably for the same
> reasons as happened in OS X (and continues on
> Linux) - lack of system APIs that suit its purpose
Linux has had suitable acceleration APIs for some time now. It's had them for a lot longer than Apple has. Adobe has just dragged it's feet in using them. Although their latest version does use what's available.
It's very effective on sites that actually use the newer rendering features that take advantage of such hardware acceleration.
It's the page, not the plugin.
Whether or not Flash sucks is also a function of the web master.
There are acceleration features in Flash but many sites don't use them. Some sites are sluggish still even running the latest version of Flash on Windows 7. Some sites are indeed CPU hogs. It's all about how they use Flash.
Adobe did need a good kick in the pants. If nothing else Cardinal Steve provided that much.
AppleTV an anemic offering...
In it's current form, the AppleTV is an anemic and rather closed off offering. Unless you want to spend all of your time converting your content (and figuring out where to store it afterwards) then you have the prospect of altering a non-user-serviceable appliance.
Even then, AppleTV + XBMC might not have the moxi for what you want to do.
Perhaps buy a Boxee Box from a local retailer that has a civilized return policy and see how it does.
Or has returning defective product gone out of style in the 21st century?
Revo + XBMC is great for streaming local content. Can't handle the likes of Hulu though.
> Rather than companies all producing stupid
> external boxes, can't they agree a standard
> connector so at the back of a TV you can
> attach a box to your flatscreen?
Yes. That's called HDMI.
Alternately, there are standards for mounting brackets for both mounting a TV to a wall or mounting a set top box to the back of the TV. My last ION nettop came with such a bracket.
OTOH, I have another nettop mounted to a 32 inch TV with velcro. Apple TV's are tiny. You could probably mount those to a wall or backside of a TV with double sided sticky tape.
Now, the problem with integrating all of your HTPC type stuff directly into the TV is the fact that technology changes and a lot of it is still pretty raw and you don't really want to dump a $600 or $5000 TV over a stupid $100 box.
I good monitor can outlive generations of external boxes (which is why the iMac approach to system design is a bit dumb).