Riaa

[ShockAndAwe^i^]

I saw this on CNN today.
I head the Bill Gates answer "you can just turn it off " and thought..thats good.
then I read this and thought..what a lie
Microsoft acts like there doing consumers a big favor!

[MagicNakor]

It's unfortunate that they're overlooking the very legal aspects to both filesharing and (more importantly) back-up copies.

[junkyardking]

Originally posted by OlderThanDirt@9 May 2003 - 05:48
Assuming Micro$oft follows through with their plans, and assuming that hardware sellers go along with those plans (the latter isn't necessarily set in stone), I'd like to do a straw poll of sorts.

Currently, I run Win98SE on a low-end P3 500mhz system with 256 megs RAM (overkill on the RAM, perhaps).  I may eventually upgrade to a faster P4.  Point is, I can't think of anything useful I could do with a 64-bit system that can't be done in a 32-bit environment.  Does anyone here plan on upgrading to a 64-bit system when it comes out?  And, if so, what things would you want it to do that you can't do now with a 32-bit system?

Also, while the speed of processing power is growing exponentially, the speed of hardware has not.  If your hard drive has a top speed of 7200 rpm, it doesn't care a hoot in Hell if a faster processor is demanding information from it at a faster clip.  The hard drive is just going to deliver information at the best speed it can muster ... period.  I think we're getting to the point where a "personal" computer is doing all that people want personal computers to do ... and that only business environments will be all that hot on getting the new toy on the block when the time for unveiling comes around.  And when Intel/AMD market their new Maserati-type chip to the public and Bill Gates releases an OS for it, they both might find themselves in for a big surprise ... that the public at large is more than happy with their Corvette-type chips and OS and have no plans on buying something they don't need.  Actually, Gates may have smelled that coffee already ... which is why Microsoft is beginning to diversify into the home-entertainment realm and is no longer relying solely on OS development and software development for income.

I think the need for faster & better computers will still be required not just for business apps, but because the need to handle multimedia which keeps getting higher in quality requiring more speed and efficenty from chips,
a good example of this is games although alot like consoles, pc's are still better even the top computers have trouble playing just released games.

The future of the Internet will probaly be virtual reality and todays computer still cant handle what will be required.


But what will the big push for will be for portable computers that are small with alot of power to handle multimedia communications and the like.
Although we have small pocket devices now, they still lack the power required for true multimedia communication, pc's tend to set the benchmark for the pocket devices and this will continue to happen.

[Switeck]

Originally posted by REALITY@6 May 2003 - 03:48
For Us...
It was compared to the Boston Tea Party, though my history is poor, the statement would not have been as strong had they stolen the Tea, would it? Well, I think you get the point.

The equivalent to the Boston Tea Party would be _destroying_ CD stocks of music stores.
We are neither destroying the merchandise nor blocking its sales.
We are just 'misusing' our personal printing presses (computers) to illegally copy copywrited materials.
Stolen tea on the other hand couldn't be used by someone else, since theft implies depravation of use.

[OlderThanDirt]

Jibbler wrote:

Well, this isn't necessarily true. There has always been a workaround in the past, because the software and the hardware were different things. Microsoft is talking about partnering with Intel and AMD to use their anti-piracy software by integrating it into the hardware.

The problem is that other companies besides Intel & AMD make CPUs. Joe Consumer might be willing to "go with the flow" and just buy what the industry sells. Other consumers who, like me, "build" rather than "buy" their systems, would take our business elsewhere. Intel/AMD are just the biggest CPU manufacturers, not the only CPU manufacturers. And, if a Micro$oft OS won't recognize CPUs without the anti-piracy integration ... well, there's always Linux (grin) ... and any number of other OSs we may see in the future.

Still (and I'm only speaking for myself), I can't fathom any use for a 64-bit OS ... which is where Micro$oft appears to want this anti-piracy integration to first appear. They did say they planned for a 2004 or 2005 rollout and, by that time, the 32-bit OS will be considered a dinosaur (but probably a popular dinosaur if others feel the same as me). I don't do games and probably wouldn't be too interested in virtual reality games either. Gates, I think, is making a wise choice in expanding into consumer electronics and portable computing. In the future, that's where the real money will be for "personal use" scenarios. While I can't say this will always be true, I do know that the 4 "build shops" in my local area still give people a choice of having an OEM version of W98SE. So, while Micro$oft may be championing more recent OSs, they must still be selling W98SE ... because the public is still asking for it.

[TIDE-HSV]

Time for a little good-natured disagreement. Without going into the bloody details, I was, more or less, dragged kicking and screaming into XP from 98SE. Now that I'm settled in it, I wonder why I persisted so long with 98 and its 64K resource bottleneck. Until you give XP a really fair try, you can't really speak knowledgeably about the differences. If you try XP, you will see the difference. On the other point, most here build their own systems. There are a number of threads on this in hardwareworld, including one started by me.

[OlderThanDirt]

I think we're talking about two different things, TIDE-HSV. I'm not knocking Windows XP, per se. What I'm saying is that Bill Gates doesn't plan to roll out his master-plan until 2004/2005 ... and, by that time, the Itanium chip and a 64-bit OS will be the norm. I just can't think of any purpose I'd put an Itanium chip to that I can't currently do on a 32-bit Pentium system. But (grin) back to the good natured disagreement:

Until you give XP a really fair try, you can't really speak knowledgeably about the differences.

I have tried it.

If you try XP, you will see the difference.

I did. It slowed my system down to a snail's-pace ... which is why I went back to Win98SE. But, if I ever do upgrade from my P3 to a P4, I may give it another go.

[OlderThanDirt]

P. S. -- And before you ask, as I mentioned earlier, I have 256 megs RAM onboard. So, I don't think RAM was an issue in XP's slowness on my system.

[MagicNakor]

Your processor speed likely could be, though.

[TIDE-HSV]

You're right, OTD. I forgot what your specs were. That processor really can't handle all the demands of XP. Also, XP loads on so many more services at startup. This has been beaten to pieces in another thread, but I force XP to run in RAM. I've got 512. However, every time I open the machine up, I look at that empty bay - and then I go check RAM prices again...