Home
About
Apple
Career
Experiences
General
Graphics
Hardware
History
Humor
Interface
Networking
OS
Opinion
Politics
Programming
Quotes
Reviews
Security
Software
Sound
Thought
Web
Cheap International
Airfare Online
Wachovia online banking
Get Free Coupons Online
Finding the perfect
discount hot tub
Payday Loans
Stock Trading Online
Stuffed Animals
Smart Investing Online
|
|
x86-64
Correction to my Correction
By: David K. Every
|
Kind:
Created:
Size: |
Article
2003-03-14
5 KB |
|
|
 |
 et me try this again and let's pretend that yesterday never happened.
My first crack at this article mentioned that I thought there was a pretty good article on x86-64 over at ars-technica: http://arstechnica.com/cpu/03q1/x86-64/x86-64-1.html and that Hannibal (John Stokes, the Author) explains many of the technical issues with AMD's new design; and is a must read for those who want to get the basics of x86-64 technology.
Then I proceeded to gently (or not so gently) rip him a new one because of many omissions (that were probably beyond the scope of the article), and one erroneous comment he made about the PowerPC.
Some people gently cried foul, and reminded me that I shouldn't be such an asshole; and they had a point. I was way harsher than I needed to be.
While it is no legitimate excuse; I just got over a bad case of food poisoning. And after the last two days of feeling and acting like the human ketchup packet that was stepped on (repeatedly), and losing 9 pounds in two days in the process, I was not exactly in my most charitable mood.
Then I get a couple of emails from people saying, "hey, this guys claiming that the next generation of PPC will not get as much a performance boost as the next generation of x86" and so on. And I'm thinking, "what kind of crack is he smoking".
Plus, I've had mixed views on Ars-Techica - I think John Siracusa's done a good job of being pretty fair; but less so with some other writers (including this one), and felt that some of their forums pick up way too many trolls, and many of them feel the need to email me with their half-informed opinions, and I feel their authors do too little to correct misinformation that they started. Still, while I like that Ars tries to address the Mac at times, I feel they fall short, or do it from a perceived PC centric point of view; and it just gets my knickers in a bunch.
So I started with a bias of being a little sensitive (over sensitive?) and in a none too good mood; and I kinda got snotty. While I feel that people that read both his article and mine would walk away understanding more than if they'd read just his, and while I still think his comment about the PowerPC was a little off base, it is no excuse for the tone. His comment was technically correct, but damn misleading - and I guess since then he made an alteration to "correct" the error. (Though I gather he was none too pleased at the tone of my article, and responded with the affection and courtesy I showed him. Big surprise). Still, I realize in all honesty, I should have cut him a little slack and given him the benefit of the doubt. Or at least sent him an email, and asked him to clarify or correct his article before I kind of went of all rabid squirrel on him.
I've almost quit "responding" to others articles for just what this last experience reminded me of. But in a lapse of crankiness, I sent off a post before self-censoring. In the future I'll remind myself of my reasons not to.
1) Generally, it requires not giving people the benefit of the doubt; and we've all made mistakes in what we said or how we said it. I've made much bigger errors than that one; so if I expect others to cut me a little breathing room, I should probably extend the courtesy to others first.
2) Another reason is that the tone just isn't nice. You can say the same things in a lot less confrontational way; and there's no reason to escalate a perceived confrontation, just because you can, or you didn't like their tone first. I'm not a pissed-off-at-the-world teen anymore, so I need to stop acting like it.
3) The last reason is that while it can make amusing copy, and people seem to enjoy reading flames, it is catering to a lower element and tone than it needs to. I'm not getting high and mighty, or going all soft or anything, and some people probably deserve a little verbal "taking to task" now and again - but if given the choice of catering to a higher element or selves, or the lower ones, we should probably try to raise ourselves up rather than bring ourselves (and society) down.
So for all those reasons, and then some, I'm eating a little crow publicly (which is how I served my displeasure at his article). I'm publicly stating that I'm sorry, wrong and was too harsh. I don't want people not to write about Macs or PowerPC's. I do wish they would be just a little careful and considerate when doing so - but I should cut them some slack when they aren't, and treat them with the same courtesy I want them to treat me - I didn't. My bad. Mea culpa.
Here's the article and tone I should have written the first time:
http://www.igeek.com/articles/Hardware/Processors/x86-64vPPC-64.txt
Hope it is a reasonable read and that you enjoy it. It says the same things, just in a much better way.
 Format for Printing  Mail
|
|
|
|
