Microsoftie clarifies Longhorn requirements

Looks like Mary Jo was wrong. From the blog of a MS developer:

First of all, let's go to MSN Search (Google brings up the same result, actually), shall we, and see if there's any official information from Microsoft. So, search for "What hardware does Longhorn need?" and you find video of Joe Beda talking about this issue over on Channel9. Now, he's one of the guys who works on Avalon. A key piece of Longhorn. I believe him before I believe any unnamed source.

Second, I go around and meet lots of people working on Longhorn. Most of us have standard Dell machines. 3GHz or so. One gig of RAM. 80GB hard drives. 128MB video card (ATI or Nvidia). Some of us are lucky and have 64 bit processors from AMD or Intel. Some of us are lucky and have high res screens. Lots of us have multiple monitors.

Here's a hint. Longhorn runs on my one-year-old machine. So, obviously the rumored requirement isn't a minimum one. At least I don't think I have a 8GHz processor yet.

Also, remember, there will be different scenarios supported. Will a business user need the same capabilities that a gamer will need? Will a Tablet PC offer the same hardware capabilities that a Dell desktop will supply?

Come on people, think!

And I thought Battlefield 1942 needed the horsepower

Longhorn to Steal Limelight at WinHEC

"Microsoft is expected to recommend that the "average" Longhorn PC feature a dual-core CPU running at 4 to 6GHz; a minimum of 2 gigs of RAM; up to a terabyte of storage; a 1 Gbit, built-in, Ethernet-wired port and an 802.11g wireless link; and a graphics processor that runs three times faster than those on the market today."

This can't be right. First of all, who has machines beefy enough to even beta test this thing? Second, Microsoft wants to sell this to as many people as it can. If they're going to require this kind of hardware, they may as well be writing an OS for the Mac.

Front-page princess

Congratulate Andrea, everyone, for having two front-page infographics in as many days in the Mercury news.

     
(Click for larger view)

Worth checking out

A beta version of Yahoo Messenger 6.0 is out. It offers a couple of neat additions, including better integration with mobile devices. It automatically forwards IMs to your phone when you're offline, and text messaging to phones is much easier. It also integrates with Launchcast, which is nice if you use the service. And you can make yourself invisible to specific contacts.

In other beta news, I've been testing the new Google Mail service, which should be more widely available soon. This one could be a category killer. It gives you a gigabyte of storage on the theory that you should never have to delete your messages. Searching is a breeze, and it automatically groups related messages while viewing. It's fast, too. Common tasks that take two or three clicks on other Web mail sites take on Google single-click or less -- choosing from a pull-down menu takes no clicks at all.

Some have raised privacy concerns because the service displays ads targeted according to the e-mail's contents (they show up only on e-mail you receive). It does feel a little weird, but the fact is, most e-mail is "read" by a series of computers on its way from the sender to the recipient. Triggering ads based on certain keywords in the e-mail doesn't mean the computer is actually comprehending it, or judging you. And for those who worry that certain keywords might attract government scrutiny, well, guess what -- that's already a reality with nearly all e-mail systems.

One minor caveat: Google says a gigabyte of storage means you never have to delete anything. Well, based on my mail over the last two days, my inbox will be full in about 4-5 years.

Looks like another GOP tactic backfired

Kerry's Vietnam record draws praise, questions

An examination of his record, supplemented by interviews with the candidate, his crewmates and some skeptics, found little to undermine Kerry's portrayal of his service.

Veterans of various wars greet him at the airport on his campaign stops, and John Hurley, national director of Veterans for Kerry, said 11,000 have signed up to support Kerry. With few exceptions, those who fought by his side, and the other veterans who support him today, are startled that anyone would question his valor.

Kerry's service evaluations, many of which were posted on his Web site this week, effusively cite his gallantry, his commitment to his service and the admiration of his men. In the coming weeks, his campaign will launch a series of ads promoting his military record -- an indication that he will continue to run on his military résumé.

Kerry campaign provides some military records

From Kerry MSNBC: "Conservative commentators, talk radio hosts and some newspapers editorials have questioned whether Kerry was deserving of his three Purple Hearts, fueling questions about his Navy service from 1966 to 1970 and the seriousness of his injuries."

In other words, chickenhawks who haven't served a single day of wartime duty.

Did Saudis assure Bush on oil prices?

From MSNBC: "The White House Monday declined to comment on a report in a new book by journalist Bob Woodward that a Saudi Arabian ambassador had promised the Bush administration that it would lower oil prices to help boost the U.S. economy in time for the November presidential election."

Did not comment, folks. As is, "did not deny."

As long as he was't lying about sex...

From Sunday's 60 Minutes:

Gets to a point where in July, the end of July 2002, they need $700 million, a large amount of money for all these tasks. And the president approves it. But Congress doesn't know and it is done. They get the money from a supplemental appropriation for the Afghan War, which Congress has approved. …Some people are gonna look at a document called the Constitution which says that no money will be drawn from the Treasury unless appropriated by Congress. Congress was totally in the dark on this.

Why is no one calling for special hearings on this, or better yet, impeachment? Woodward goes on to reveal how the Bushies told the foreign, terrorism-funding, non-democratic government of Saudi Arabia about our war plans before we briefed Secretary of State Colin Powell. Where's Ann Coulter and her shrill accusations of treason?

I wasn't the only one who noticed the inconsistency...

So did Slate's William Saletan.

Depends on What the Meaning of "Polls" Is
Bush says he doesn't use polls. An adviser says he did.

For the record, I posted mine first.

Bush Takes Strategic No-Remorse Stance

From the NY Times: "One adviser said the White House had examined polling and focus group studies in determining that it would be a mistake for Mr. Bush to appear to yield."

This from the same president who said on Monday: "And as to whether or not I made decisions based upon polls, I don’t. I just don’t make decisions that way."

Man, what a bald-faced liar.

And now, a word from our Dear Leader...

Quagmire

Shiite rebels in control

"The battle for this Sunni Muslim stronghold continued for a fourth day Thursday, and five more U.S. troops were reported killed. In Iraq's south, militiamen loyal to an anti-U.S. Shiite cleric controlled large swaths of three cities."

That's 40 U.S. soldiers killed this week. Let's express that as a ratio of U.S. deaths per weapon of mass destruction confiscated. Oh yeah, you can't divide by zero.

Yay!

Verizon to offer the Treo 600 From Engadget

They haven't said anything official yet, and there's nothing more than a "Coming Soon" on their homepage, but we have some good news that we think is going to make a lot of people happy: Verizon Wireless is finally going to carry the Treo 600. And it sure took them long enough, too. Sprint was offering the phone nearly six months ago, and we'd almost thought that Verizon was going to skip the Treo 600 altogether and just wait for the 610 to come out.

Anti-U.S. Uprising Widens in Iraq; Marines Push Deeper Into Fallujah

I can't wait until Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and all their acolytes start blaming Demoncrats bad attittude for this miserable failure. In other words, we didn't clap our hands hard enough, so Tinkerbell died.

Audio Codec Quality Shootout

This taste test by Extreme Tech makes me feel a little better about my hard-thought decision a few months ago to encode and store all of my CDs in WMA format instead of MP3. Everything I'd read said WMA (Series 9) was better, but I worried about compatibility issues: a lot of devices support WMA, but nearly everything supports MP3. What if I ever wanted to buy an iPod?

The clincher for me was Windows Media Player's automatic song-organizing and downsampling abilities. It fetches album art in the background and integrates that info into Windows native file system -- unlike Apple's iTunes, win which you have to open an application to get all the relevant info. The downsampling feature means it can shrink files on the fly while transferring them to a portable audio device.

Well as it turns out, the Media Player can do that with MP3s, too. And that made me wonder if I made the right choice going with WMA. Apparently, I did. Now, if only Apple would back down and let the iPod play WMA files.

(I expected a deluge of angry comments from Mac fans on the article, but several posters make some valid criticism of the article's methodology.)

Maybe Bush is a uniter after all...

Muslim rivals unite in Baghdad uprising

More flowers of welcome from the Iraqis

12 Marines killed in new fighting

I'm guessing the Bush campaign will be trotting out those "Mission Accomplished" photos anytime soon. It's time to fire Don Rumsfield and send in more troops. There's no realistic way to pull out of Bush's mistake now, so we need to suck it up and do the job right.

And of course, fire Bush in November.

What if...

I'm doing research for a story I'm doing on the 40th anniversary of the mainframe computer and came across an interesting tidbit: IBM in the late 1970s was toying with the idea of rebranding Atari computers to create a PC line -- it's attempt to take on these crazy Apple IIs and TRS 80s that were so popular at the time.

IBM's executive council rejected the idea, and as we all know, IBM built its own PC line, albeit using off-the-shelf components. The rest is history. (In a last gasp, Atari would eventually develop its own line of IBM-compatible PCs.)

I can't help thinking whether the Atari platform would have become standard had IBM had gone ahead with the idea. Would the platform, which would presumably be harder to clone, have become so dominant? Would Motorola (which made the chip) be the dominant CPU maker rather than Intel? Given my experience with Atari, would I have become a programmer instead of a journalist?

Did someone say 'quagmire?'

Rioting sweeps Iraqi cities; 8 U.S. soldiers killed

Now that the Shia hate us along with the Sunni, the only group left to alienate are the Kurds.

Not to beat a dead horse, but...

Powell no longer sure that Iraqi trailers were weapons labs