@Electromodo

"I also think 3D has a big potential to benefit the storyline"

Can you back that up with an example?

@Gflo I don't think there is a 3D craze; it's more a case of movie studios and consumer electronics companies pushing it very hard. I think the incident at the Cowboys game proved that the majority of people really aren't interested.

For movies it's nothing more than a gimmick but for gaming I think it could be good.

Since when was carbon dioxide a "pollution"? Last time I checked if there was no carbon dioxide all the plants would die and as a result we would die soon afterwards. This dress is obviously made by total morons.

@gerrrg You're getting confused - x64 is simply an abbreviation of x86-64 It's not a new architecture but simply the 64bit extensions to the x86 architecture. Check out the wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86-64

x64 is just one of many extensions to the x86 instruction set (MMX, 3DNow, SSE, etc):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X86#Extensions

The processor architecture is still x86. This was what JeremyBenthem was pointing out but you seem to have misinterpreted what he was saying.

No doubt the resolution to this will be another large fine for Intel. Fining them in no way makes up for the harm they've done to the market place through their anti-competitive practices. The FTC should instead make them open up the x86 architecture, thus allowing new competitors into the market and making up for the damage Intel has done in stifling competition.

@realar 2D isn't just good enough, in my opinion it's better. 3D is just a gimmick that adds nothing of value and just causes distraction. I like to see the occasional 3D film but would prefer most video to remain 2D.

For a period of about 6 years AMD were ahead of Intel in terms of overall performance, performance per dollar, performance per clock, performance per watt and overall power usage. They were also far more innovative than Intel, moving the memory controller onto the processor, introducing multi-core processors and and introducing 64bit processors all way before Intel. If Intel hadn't abused their position AMD would probably have made a lot more than $1.25billion and would be in a much stronger position than they are today. Personally I think this settlement is a disgrace and vastly under values the damage Intel has done through their anti-competitive practices. I think the $2billion the EU fined Intel should also be given to AMD instead of wasted on the policies of corrupt, self-serving bureaucrats.

Hopefully AMD will use this $1.25billion for R&D so they can once again become competitive with Intel and return to innovating instead of playing catch-up.

@J D Imagine every device followed the ridiculous principle of having an external power supply - you'd end up with a mess of power bricks for you TV, monitor, speakers, DVD player, cable box etc etc.

I've hated external power supplies since the Gamecube and having a single larger unit keeps things much neater than having power bricks all over the place.

I don't really see why anyone would want these monitors. If you used three regular projectors you could have a bigger screen, higher resolution and no bezel all for lower price.

This is hardly surprising when Windows 7 pre-orders were selling for less than a quarter of the price of Vista Home Preimum. If they sold it for $0.01 it would probably have sold about a hundred times what any previous operating system sold but that wouldn't have made it a success.

Higher sales volume at a lower price point is nothing surprising and the important information is that revenue for the Windows 7 launch is down 18% on the Vista launch. Hardware sales also increased by a lesser margin than the Vista launch – they were up 170% week-on-week and 68% year-on-year for Vista but only 95% week-on-week and 49% year-on-year for Windows 7. It seems nobody really wants Windows 7 and the only way Microsoft are getting people to take it is by practically giving it away.

http://i45.tinypic.com/2uibqk5.jpg