 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Q Cubed
|
 |
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999
time: 23:30
|
|
quote:
That's what all the Slashdot people have been saying. IIRC you could do that with OS X and Xgrid anyway. |
Why would I want the overhead of OS X and Xgrid?
Fez, the reason why you might want to buy Mac Minis in bulk is because alone, they're near worthless as a platform. When you have twenty, thirty, a hundred, you get some probably get some nice discounts, as well has having enough small computers to build a cluster for high-performance computing. Don't let your knee-jerk hate of Macs blind you to the power and promise of clustering--that's how a lot of supercomputers these days get made.
Of course, most of them are done with x86.
Also, I'm not sure how the economics works out, but the major problem with the Mac Mini is that even at its price point, it's still cheaper in most cases to go with the x86 solution.
Besides, people have done that with Xboxes, as Asher has pointed out, as with PS2s (MIPS clusters... like one at Argonne), and so on.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
Name one. |
All of them - designed to inflate your ego by trashing and attacking other people.
quote:
But it's not -- you say I lie "all the time" and make things up to support my case. That, ironically, is a lie. You always point to the same two examples, both of which are not accurate. For example, the iTunes deleting your music when you moved to a non-USA country with a non-USA credit card -- I didn't make that up, in fact I've linked you to the article many times since. The fact that it doesn't do that any more -- in response to the public backlash, no doubt -- doesn't make it a lie. |
The whole thing was a lie. I knew people at the time that article was posted who had moved from the US and suffered no problem. IIRC that person just screwed things up some other way - probably deauthorized their computer. On the very same day you posted that rot, Drake was happily sitting in Japan playing his purchased music.
quote:
I'm aggressive online, that doesn't make me anti-social. That's also not even what the point said that you quoted -- I'm one of those types who always has to plan a head. I'm not one of those impulsive people. It bothers me to not have a plan... |
As I said, there are degrees to this sort of thing. Many successful people suffer from this disorder. The quotes you pulled down apply to severe cases and only to men.
quote:
Aggressive debater = anti-social? |
Malicious = anti-social.
quote:
Lack of remorse? Just how do you prove that based on Apolyton? |
I think plenty of people on Apolyton know just what I mean.
quote:
Quit playing games, man. You're usually wrong, and you're way off here again. Professional psychiatrists who I've dealt with strongly disagree with you, as does common sense with a list of the symptoms. |
I'm not playing games.
quote:
You're almost always out of your league, but you'll never admit it, or admit defeat. |
Because you don't give me reason to. You simply repeat your opinion again and again, and selectively quote "facts" to bolster your prejudices.
quote:
I'm aggressive online because I have a low tolerance for ignorance. It's not that I constantly just insult people (though it does get to that point with specific people whose names I won't mention), I try to educate as well. I try to post rational, details arguments with support for my claims. In constrast, you exist just to be a contrarian. Seldom do you actually know what's being talked about, and even more rare is when you can actually build an argument based on facts and logic. You're just here to use whimsical rhetoric and ad hominems. |
Guilty on the whimsical rhetoric, but what's wrong with that in small doses? I don't believe I have ever posted an ad hominem argument in the technical sense of the term.
Your attempts at facts and logic more often than not consist of vague and unproven generalizations that you take as gospel and refuse to defend properly.
The truth is that you take pleasure in malice.
quote:
This thread is a brilliant example. Not only did you first try the smoke-and-mirror approach to debate, you've since abandonded that completely to try to discredit me by trying to analyze my personality now. The best part is, that, too, is wildly inaccurate. |
Really? All I can see is that you were proved wrong. You asked for evidence and I supplied it, whereupon you tried to change the subject.
Someone else brought up the issue of your personality, not me.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Giancarlo
|
 |
Los Angeles
Apr 2000
time: 02:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Q Cubed
Fez, the reason why you might want to buy Mac Minis in bulk is because alone, they're near worthless as a platform. When you have twenty, thirty, a hundred, you get some probably get some nice discounts, as well has having enough small computers to build a cluster for high-performance computing. Don't let your knee-jerk hate of Macs blind you to the power and promise of clustering--that's how a lot of supercomputers these days get made. |
You can do it better when buying PCs in bulk, especially Sempron based CPUs. I hate Macs and I hate any attempts to ever bring them into the market place.
quote:
Also, I'm not sure how the economics works out, but the major problem with the Mac Mini is that even at its price point, it's still cheaper in most cases to go with the x86 solution. |
I told you so.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
 |
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
Really? All I can see is that you were proved wrong. You asked for evidence and I supplied it, whereupon you tried to change the subject. |
How does asking for evidence prove someone wrong?
I'm seriously perplexed! How the hell can you ever get in a position of teaching philosophy at a university level?
You said Paul Thurrott said WMP was a bad immitation of iTunes, and I asked you to link it because this was news to me. You linked a review he wrote in which he compares it to iTunes, and I guess that suffices as a citation to you.
Even then, that's not proving me wrong. I don't know anything and everything Paul said (he has some crazy ideas), and I didn't even know he had a blog site.
You need to understand how arguments actually work. Asking for a citation and then providing one that can sorta-but-no-really be construed mean what you wanted it to mean doesn't mean you "win" the argument.
And I didn't try to change the subject, it just became clear your entire position was "Paul is a windows zealot and compared WMP to iTunes and said iTunes is better for music only, and WMP and iTunes have similar features, so therefore he said WMP ripped off iTunes"... That's clearly not a real argument, and there was no point in getting you to copy/paste more irrelevant spam to bury the issue.
quote:
Someone else brought up the issue of your personality, not me. |
Another Mac user made a silly comment about me having an "inferiority complex", and then you went on this big thing about me being anti-social instead of responding to my actual posts.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
Even Microsoft explicitly admits copying itunes to some degree. It's common knowledge. |
That's news to me -- are you basing this off your earlier quote about MS saying Apple set a "high standard" with the iTMS? If it is, I'm sorry to point this out to you a second time, but the music store is not the player. Exhibit C of Mac User reading into a quote what he wants to hear, not what is actually said.
quote:
Not another one of your "the article doesn't say what it most obviously says" arguments. I remember the last one of these: the man who meant that the ipod was worse than Creative's players, despite explicitly saying the opposite in the conclusion of his argument. |
No, that was another blatant example of your Mac Cult in you reading what you want to read. The article compares WMP to iTunes and notes that WMP had some features iTunes also had. It doesn't mention anything like other apps having those features before iTunes did, either. This does not equate to saying WMP is a "poor immitation of iTunes", in any way.
Your type are notorious for this. You're so used to bad news with Apple it's a subconscious thing you've developed over the years, to read into articles that are not intended.
quote:
Because you are certifiable. |
I am certified, MCSE and A+. They're fairly worthless. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
|
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Asher
That's news to me -- are you basing this off your earlier quote about MS saying Apple set a "high standard" with the iTMS? If it is, I'm sorry to point this out to you a second time, but the music store is not the player. Exhibit C of Mac User reading into a quote what he wants to hear, not what is actually said. |
What the New York Times said:
quote:
"Apple set the bar very high," a Microsoft manger admitted. "We're trying to match that. We told our developers, 'Look at how Apple does it.'" |
In what alternate universe does this not mean, "imitate Apple's way"? Is he saying "look at the way Apple does it, and do it some other way"?
Of course not.
As for Thurrott:
quote:
Fans of iTunes might be confused for thinking this product is a melding of both iTunes and WMP 9. |
What does this mean? Does it mean that WMP 10 is nothing like itunes?
Of course not.
Does it mean that MS has made WMP 10 more like itunes?
That is the obvious interpretation, one that is confirmed by actually looking at it.
How do you make one thing more like something else? You imitate it.
quote:
No, that was another blatant example of your Mac Cult in you reading what you want to read. The article compares WMP to iTunes and notes that WMP had some features iTunes also had. It doesn't mention anything like other apps having those features before iTunes did, either. This does not equate to saying WMP is a "poor immitation of iTunes", in any way. |
Thurrott thinks that itunes is a better music player with a better interface. Quotes can be found in my previous post.
Thurrott thinks (as does any rational being who looks at the two) that MS has made WMP more like itunes.
So can distill two statements: "WMP is a worse music player than itunes" and "WMP is trying to be like itunes".
Together these imply that MS tried to make their player more itunes like and failed, coming up with something that he (Thurrott) thinks isn't as good.
quote:
Your type are notorious for this. You're so used to bad news with Apple it's a subconscious thing you've developed over the years, to read into articles that are not intended. |
It's called being able to read. That's what he says. Of course, it's his opinion which one may or may not agree with, but that is what he says.
But what's the point of actually reading the articles when you can accuse people of being in a cult? 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Agathon
What the New York Times said:
quote:
"Apple set the bar very high," a Microsoft manger admitted. "We're trying to match that. We told our developers, 'Look at how Apple does it.'" |
In what alternate universe does this not mean, "imitate Apple's way"? Is he saying "look at the way Apple does it, and do it some other way"?
Of course not. |
You're playing games again, and you intentionally took that quote out of context. Getting desperate?
The beginning of that quote was:
quote:
The Microsoft music store (in beta at music.msn.com) couldn't look more like Apple's iTunes music store (itunes.com) if you ran it through a copying machine." |
It should be pretty clear that they're talking about the Microsoft Music Store, and not Windows Media Player...
As for Thurrott:
quote:
What does this mean? Does it mean that WMP 10 is nothing like itunes?
Of course not.
Does it mean that MS has made WMP 10 more like itunes?
That is the obvious interpretation, one that is confirmed by actually looking at it.
How do you make one thing more like something else? You imitate it. |
It means WMP10 gained some features -- like the quicksearch -- that have been a staple in other media players well before even iTunes. Paul is a columnist, he's entitled to his opinion, but I don't see him calling WMP a "poor imitation" of iTunes. At BEST, I see him saying some useful features in iTunes made it into WMP as well. But iTunes didn't originate thse features either.
Your quote was a stretch, and can only be interpreted as calling WMP a poor immitation of iTunes if you twist and manipulate it like you want to do.
quote:
Thurrott thinks that itunes is a better music player with a better interface. Quotes can be found in my previous post.
Thurrott thinks (as does any rational being who looks at the two) that MS has made WMP more like itunes.
So can distill two statements: "WMP is a worse music player than itunes" and "WMP is trying to be like itunes". |
Again, you're jumping to conclusions.
1) He never said WMP copied iTunes, he said WMP10 shares some new features found in iTunes -- features which existed in players like Winamp well before iTunes or WMP10 had them)
2) He says people used to iTunes would probably not switch for a music player only, but he still has praise for WMP10 as well -- and it does far more than iTunes anyway. You would need to explain why a product he praises (even if he says it may not be the best for a particular task), is "poor".
This is stupid, anyway. I asked for a quote of Thurrott calling WMP a poor immitation of iTunes, and I've yet to receive one. All I've gotten was snippits from you saying he thinks iTunes users won't switch to WMP, and that they have similar features in WMP10.
Winamp > iTunes/WMP in any case.
quote:
But what's the point of actually reading the articles when you can accuse people of being in a cult? |
It's not an accusation, it's an observation. Many Mac-buyers are startlingly cult-like...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Asher
|
|
Calgary, Alberta
Nov 1999
time: 22:30
|
|
By the way, Agathon. Consider yourself pwn3d.
I actually emailed Paul Thurrott to get his take. 
quote:
Hi Paul,
I was hoping you could help me settle a silly disagreement I have with a friend of mine, regarding your review of Windows Media Player 10. He asserts that it's clear in your WMP10 review (http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/wmp10.asp) that you think WMP10 is an "inferior copy of iTunes". Do you agree or disagree with that assertion? |
His response:
quote:
No, I don't think WMP 10 is an inferior copy of iTunes. I do believe that Microsoft tried to make WMP 10 as simple as iTunes, though it hasn't quite met that goal. On the other hand, WMP 10's primary advantage over iTunes--and it's a big one--is that it's extensible by third party services, and can host those services. So with iTunes, you get the iTunes Music Store, and that's it. With WMP10, you gain access to all kinds of online services, many of which are quite a bit better than the iTunes Music Store. This extensibility also allows third parties to create solutions that would otherwise be impossible. For example, MediaFour's XPlay lets the iPod work from within WMP 10.
I like the simplicity of Apple's iTunes, and it's certainly "lighter" than WMP 10. But like most things in life, there's no black and white answer to which one is better, iTunes or WMP 10. They both have certain advantages. |
PM me an email address and I can forward it to you. 
As I said, you read what you want to hear into articles and columns, not what is actually said.
He states -- as I said -- the goal of WMP10 was to simplify the UI, not to copy iTunes.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30.
Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-01-2005 22:06
You didn't tell me anything... You didn't even mention this in your original post about a Mac Mini cluster...
|