lbm: pounds mass
lbf: pounds force
lbs: should be pound seconds, a unit of impulse.
Using lbm instead of slug for units of mass leads to such horror as this: (F [lbf])=(m [lbm])(a [ft/s^2])/(32.174).
Both confusing and painfully inelegant. Shudder. Please can we switch to SI?
Not having access to a second mouse button drove me crazy when I first bought a Powerbook. The two-fingers-plus-click for a right click was originally my idea. I submitted it as a feature request to the developer of iScroll2 (a trackpad driver that provided two-finger scrolling) in Feb 2005, and he immediately implemented it. I don't know if Apple copied it or invented it independently, but regardless, I now much prefer this approach over having a dedicated second button for the reason you mention.
I like to tell myself that given enough time I could rewrite almost any application that I have ever used. I say almost because of one crystal clear exception: Mathematica. The power of that program is incredible. I'm not too keen on the user interface (it seems backwards to anyone raised on MATLAB), but nevertheless what Wolfram has accomplished with Mathematica is awe-inspiring.
The only two Windows programs that I missed when I switched to the Mac were Microsoft Money 2002 and Windows Spider Solitaire. I wrote my own Spider Solitaire clone to teach myself Cocoa, but I'm still stuck using Virtual PC for Money. As soon as something comes along for the Mac that can meet my finance-tracking needs, I'll be free of Windows completely!
Just as with C++, regular C code can be used in an Objective C program, but still be treated the same, so you can us[e] C with Cocoa.
To be more precise, Objective C is a strict superset of C, while C++ is not. This means that C code can be included anywhere in an Objective C project, but to use pure C in a C++ project you have to do some minor massaging. For example, in C++ you need to modify your C h-files with
Every one I have seen puts the buttons together at the bottom, which means you have one finger (well, thumb) controlling multiple buttons. This is not convenient, and leads to wrong-clicking and no speed advantage (since you need to move your thumb to switch buttons)
This is definitely true. After getting used to using my new Powerbook (my first Mac), I feel weird working with the buttons on PC laptops. I do, however, sorely miss the efficiency that comes with having a second button. I think the solution is to provide a second, smaller right button. It wouldn't even necessarily have to be rectangular. Here are three possible solutions, two off the top of my head and one repeated from another post:
left button 3/4, right button 1/4.
Shrink the main button to 3/4 its normal size, and put the right button in the vacated space. This would retain the emphasis on the main button, making it obvious to inexperienced users which button they should default to using. It would also reduce concerns over accidentally right-clicking.
Right button triangular
Make the main button trapezoidal (smaller edge on top), and put a smaller triangular button in each of the right and left hand upper corners. This could dramatically reduce or eliminate the problem of accidentally right-clicking, as it seems to me to be an unnatural (though not difficult) motion to click the upper corner of a Powerbook mouse button. Having a "right" button in both the left and right corners addresses handedness issues.
Hidden second button (two switches)
Someone else posted this idea in this thread, but it's good enough to repeat: put two switches under the button instead of one. Allow the user to enable the second switch, such that pressing on the left side of the button is a left click, and pressing on the right side is a right click. The only problem with this approach is that it does not address the issue of accidental clickage. Other than that, it seems like the perfect fix.
I have been skydiving twice (static line), and I have over two hours of accumulated zero-g time in the Vomit Comet. The two experiences are not at all similar.
The initial sensation from jumping out of an airplane is one of complete sensory overload; your body just does not know what is happening to it, and doesn't know how to respond. After that, you're rushing towards the ground at high speed. Imagine sticking your head out the window at over 100 MPH on the freeway to get a rough idea of the feeling. With the static line, the free-fall portion of the dive lasted only a few seconds, but it was still enough to experience the feeling.
Flying parabolas is much more calm, except that the airplane engines can be rather loud during the pull-up (1.8 g) phase. You're constantly rotating: pitching up during high g and pitching down during low g. Flying around in zero-g doesn't make you sick; rather, it's the transitions from zero to 1.8 and vice versa that make you sick. Because you alternate back and forth between the two, you actually get used to the feelings of weightlessness and heaviness pretty quickly, but that doesn't make it any less fun. My experiments required a lot of attention, and so often the primary thing that reminded me I was in zero g was the fact that I had to hold on to something to keep from floating away. The most fun thing I did was fly lengthwise down the airplane, like Superman. Spinning is a blast too.
If you get the chance, I highly recommend trying both, as they're each unique experiences!
Actually Pixar is the exception to the rule. Most big companies (ILM, Weta, DD, Imageworks, R+H, Tippett, etc.) are a combination of Linux, SGI and PCs. Small studios are mainly PC/Win based.
Apple's Shake has been used by the last seven Oscar winners for best visual effects. Granted, I don't know how much of the work was done on Apple hardware, but their software is certainly popular.
"We're thrilled that for seven years in a row, movies created with Shake have won the Oscar for best visual effects,"
said Steve Jobs, Apple's CEO
Think about it, this really does nothing to hurt Apple's business model.... What this does mean though, is that I can now play my purchased music on my Linux workstation, and possibly get a portable player that's not an iPod that will play these.
Apple did not create the iTMS to sell music. They created it to sell iPods. Circumventing their (very liberal) DRM restrictions goes directly against Apple's business model and by definition is not fair use, because when you bought the music, you agreed to be bound by the restrictions. Apple is offering customers an alternative way to purchase music, but they are only doing this because it is in their best interests financially: it sells iPods and (they hope) Macs. If you want a music format that can play anywhere out of the box, you are free to ignore iTMS and buy CDs instead.
The only legitimate use for this that I can see is as a safeguard against Apple someday stopping support for the format, but there will be plenty of time to worry about that if it ever happens.
I am once again baffled by Apple's decision to continue placing only a single mouse button on their supposedly professional-level Powerbooks.
I think Apple's decision to ship desktop computers with a single-button mouse by default makes sense, since it forces software makers to design to the needs of the novice user. I can even understand the choice to use a single button on the consumer-level iBooks.
<rant> The thing that drives me nuts, however, is that they choose to cripple their supposedly professional Powerbook line by omitting a second mouse button. People purchasing a professional-level laptop should have enough sense to ignore the second mouse button if they don't want to use it. If Apple has that little confidence in the common sense of its users, they could simply make a preferences switch that causes button two to act as another button one. This really can't be that hard to do!!
</rant>
I have been wanting to get a Powerbook for almost a year now, but I simply can't function efficiently without a second mouse button (and no, I don't want to rely on an external mouse on a laptop computer), so once again, I have to put off buying an Apple laptop in the hopes that at some point in the near future they'll decide to equip their professional-level computers with a professional-level input device. Honestly, in spite of continued innovation by Apple in so many areas, this seemingly simple issue sometimes makes me wonder if they have any clue at all what would really be beneficial to their users.
This follows closely on the heels of the FCC's lifting of the restrictions on AIM, as discussed recently. Seems that MS thinks that if AIM can get away with locking people out, so can they.
Actually, Apple is not claiming to have a Unix operating system. They simply state that OSX is "Unix-based," which it definitely is. IANAL, but if they don't claim that it is Unix, they shouldn't have to meet the Unix standard.
Missing from this list is the biggest space structure I've ever heard proposed, the solid Dyson sphere, a modification of a concept proposed by the astronomer Freeman Dyson. A solid Dyson sphere is a shell constructed around a star, so that all the star's energy is contained. One of these built around the Sun at the radius of the Earth's orbit would have a diameter of 3x10^8 km.
There's an episode of ST:TNG in which the NCC-1701-D crew finds Scottie marooned on the surface of a Dyson sphere, where he has trapped himself in a transporter loop for several decades in order to survive.
a) the application of science and mathematics by which the properties of matter and the sources of energy in nature are made useful to people b) the design and manufacture of complex products software engineering
This does not say that all programmers are engineers, nor does it imply that all software development can be labeled as software engineering. It simply states that software engineering, however it might be properly defined, is an example of engineering.
Slashdot Mirror
lbm: pounds mass
lbf: pounds force
lbs: should be pound seconds, a unit of impulse.
Using lbm instead of slug for units of mass leads to such horror as this: (F [lbf])=(m [lbm])(a [ft/s^2])/(32.174).
Both confusing and painfully inelegant. Shudder. Please can we switch to SI?
Not having access to a second mouse button drove me crazy when I first bought a Powerbook. The two-fingers-plus-click for a right click was originally my idea. I submitted it as a feature request to the developer of iScroll2 (a trackpad driver that provided two-finger scrolling) in Feb 2005, and he immediately implemented it. I don't know if Apple copied it or invented it independently, but regardless, I now much prefer this approach over having a dedicated second button for the reason you mention.
Mark
I like to tell myself that given enough time I could rewrite almost any application that I have ever used. I say almost because of one crystal clear exception: Mathematica. The power of that program is incredible. I'm not too keen on the user interface (it seems backwards to anyone raised on MATLAB), but nevertheless what Wolfram has accomplished with Mathematica is awe-inspiring.
The only two Windows programs that I missed when I switched to the Mac were Microsoft Money 2002 and Windows Spider Solitaire. I wrote my own Spider Solitaire clone to teach myself Cocoa, but I'm still stuck using Virtual PC for Money. As soon as something comes along for the Mac that can meet my finance-tracking needs, I'll be free of Windows completely!
To be more precise, Objective C is a strict superset of C, while C++ is not. This means that C code can be included anywhere in an Objective C project, but to use pure C in a C++ project you have to do some minor massaging. For example, in C++ you need to modify your C h-files with
See the Wikipedia for more information.
This is definitely true. After getting used to using my new Powerbook (my first Mac), I feel weird working with the buttons on PC laptops. I do, however, sorely miss the efficiency that comes with having a second button. I think the solution is to provide a second, smaller right button. It wouldn't even necessarily have to be rectangular. Here are three possible solutions, two off the top of my head and one repeated from another post:
left button 3/4, right button 1/4.
Shrink the main button to 3/4 its normal size, and put the right button in the vacated space. This would retain the emphasis on the main button, making it obvious to inexperienced users which button they should default to using. It would also reduce concerns over accidentally right-clicking.
Right button triangular
Make the main button trapezoidal (smaller edge on top), and put a smaller triangular button in each of the right and left hand upper corners. This could dramatically reduce or eliminate the problem of accidentally right-clicking, as it seems to me to be an unnatural (though not difficult) motion to click the upper corner of a Powerbook mouse button. Having a "right" button in both the left and right corners addresses handedness issues.
Hidden second button (two switches)
Someone else posted this idea in this thread, but it's good enough to repeat: put two switches under the button instead of one. Allow the user to enable the second switch, such that pressing on the left side of the button is a left click, and pressing on the right side is a right click. The only problem with this approach is that it does not address the issue of accidental clickage. Other than that, it seems like the perfect fix.
I have been skydiving twice (static line), and I have over two hours of accumulated zero-g time in the Vomit Comet. The two experiences are not at all similar.
The initial sensation from jumping out of an airplane is one of complete sensory overload; your body just does not know what is happening to it, and doesn't know how to respond. After that, you're rushing towards the ground at high speed. Imagine sticking your head out the window at over 100 MPH on the freeway to get a rough idea of the feeling. With the static line, the free-fall portion of the dive lasted only a few seconds, but it was still enough to experience the feeling.
Flying parabolas is much more calm, except that the airplane engines can be rather loud during the pull-up (1.8 g) phase. You're constantly rotating: pitching up during high g and pitching down during low g. Flying around in zero-g doesn't make you sick; rather, it's the transitions from zero to 1.8 and vice versa that make you sick. Because you alternate back and forth between the two, you actually get used to the feelings of weightlessness and heaviness pretty quickly, but that doesn't make it any less fun. My experiments required a lot of attention, and so often the primary thing that reminded me I was in zero g was the fact that I had to hold on to something to keep from floating away. The most fun thing I did was fly lengthwise down the airplane, like Superman. Spinning is a blast too.
If you get the chance, I highly recommend trying both, as they're each unique experiences!
I wouldn't trust any Thermal Protection System until all the employees have submitted their TPS reports in triplicate.
Apple's Shake has been used by the last seven Oscar winners for best visual effects. Granted, I don't know how much of the work was done on Apple hardware, but their software is certainly popular.
Apple did not create the iTMS to sell music. They created it to sell iPods. Circumventing their (very liberal) DRM restrictions goes directly against Apple's business model and by definition is not fair use, because when you bought the music, you agreed to be bound by the restrictions. Apple is offering customers an alternative way to purchase music, but they are only doing this because it is in their best interests financially: it sells iPods and (they hope) Macs. If you want a music format that can play anywhere out of the box, you are free to ignore iTMS and buy CDs instead.
The only legitimate use for this that I can see is as a safeguard against Apple someday stopping support for the format, but there will be plenty of time to worry about that if it ever happens.
I think Apple's decision to ship desktop computers with a single-button mouse by default makes sense, since it forces software makers to design to the needs of the novice user. I can even understand the choice to use a single button on the consumer-level iBooks.
<rant>
The thing that drives me nuts, however, is that they choose to cripple their supposedly professional Powerbook line by omitting a second mouse button. People purchasing a professional-level laptop should have enough sense to ignore the second mouse button if they don't want to use it. If Apple has that little confidence in the common sense of its users, they could simply make a preferences switch that causes button two to act as another button one. This really can't be that hard to do!!
</rant>
I have been wanting to get a Powerbook for almost a year now, but I simply can't function efficiently without a second mouse button (and no, I don't want to rely on an external mouse on a laptop computer), so once again, I have to put off buying an Apple laptop in the hopes that at some point in the near future they'll decide to equip their professional-level computers with a professional-level input device. Honestly, in spite of continued innovation by Apple in so many areas, this seemingly simple issue sometimes makes me wonder if they have any clue at all what would really be beneficial to their users.
-Apogaion
This follows closely on the heels of the FCC's lifting of the restrictions on AIM, as discussed recently. Seems that MS thinks that if AIM can get away with locking people out, so can they.
Actually, Apple is not claiming to have a Unix operating system. They simply state that OSX is "Unix-based," which it definitely is. IANAL, but if they don't claim that it is Unix, they shouldn't have to meet the Unix standard.
Apogaion
Missing from this list is the biggest space structure I've ever heard proposed, the solid Dyson sphere, a modification of a concept proposed by the astronomer Freeman Dyson. A solid Dyson sphere is a shell constructed around a star, so that all the star's energy is contained. One of these built around the Sun at the radius of the Earth's orbit would have a diameter of 3x10^8 km.
There's an episode of ST:TNG in which the NCC-1701-D crew finds Scottie marooned on the surface of a Dyson sphere, where he has trapped himself in a transporter loop for several decades in order to survive.
This does not say that all programmers are engineers, nor does it imply that all software development can be labeled as software engineering. It simply states that software engineering, however it might be properly defined, is an example of engineering.