Watch out for flying manhole covers, my friend. Hey, do you know where there's an "Internet cafe" in DC? I could've sworn I remember one in Georgetown. I want a place, besides my home or workplace, to drink coffee and use my laptop. So I'm remembering these coffeeshops wired with 100baseTX you hear about from time to time... I mean, DC isn't as wired as SF or NYC, but it's gotta have at least one, right?
The alternative is to send up my own satellite and carry around a backpack transmitter, so I can read Slashdot while in the Barnes & Noble on M Street.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
I love the drinker's mentality. "I can drink more poison than you without getting sick or passing out, therefore I am more of a man! Rarrr! Grunt!" Real geeks drink caffeine. Alcohol slows you down, man.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
Who are these two other people you're living with?
The two people he lives with are Mr. Jones and Mr. Pinkerton. Mr. Jones and Mr. Pinkerton are false identities used in the process of embezzling funds from Strider's employer, Uncle Sam, and have a combined income of $5.6 million. Their income is deposited directly into Swiss bank accounts, which Strider is then sent from Mr. Heppler, his fictitious rich uncle in Switzerland. Mr. Jones' and Mr. Pinkerton's activities will soon be discover by the authorities, and the fictitious criminal Dirty Stephen will be suspected. Dirty Stephen, unfortunately, died a fictitious death last Thursday, and so with no one to blame, the authorities give up. Strider gets away scott-free! (Scott Free is also a false identity.)
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
No shit, man. Maybe it's Data from Star Trek? The only TV I watch is the occasional South Park or UCB. And the occasional random movie on Bravo or IFC. I can only keep away from the PC for three hours, tops.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
LOL, that's hilarious... one person being ostracised after it becomes known that he paid for WindowsME, mysterious disk erasures in the middle of the night, the discovery that someone switched the coffee with decaf, a dozen different erratic sleep schedules colliding. Make sure you know what kind of geeks you're getting into bed with, so to speak.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
. . . the keyboard can be put on one's lap, the mouse is not always needed or can be in the keyboard, and the case with all the real stuff can be anywhere that cables reach. But the monitor always has to be close to you. And it's heavy and bulky. Thus, the need for a desk. You can put a computer on the floor, but not a monitor.
I've never seen this as a problem. I switch the keyboard between my lap and the desk, and the desk provides a convenient palce for books, drinks, et cetera. I don't put my PC on the floor because I'm often messing with various things in it, and because I don't want my 8 fans sucking crap from the floor into the PC. I don't get it... Are you complaining about monitors, or desks?:-)
Also, note that these are being marketed for use with laptops, to save power.
Well, actually, I've been told by professional ergonomics people (snicker) that shifting your eyes to distant objects ever so often reduces monitor-related eyestrain -- it's not good to stare at the same thing for a really long time.
This brings up another point... when I'm using a PC (whether desktop or laptop), I've noticed that my eyes often flit away to other things in the room, on my desk, et cetera. I imagine this helps reduce eyestrain considerably. But when using the eShades, you don't have much else to look at but the screen. And if you do, it's a significantly shift in focus from something that's an inch in front of your eyes to a several feet, and back and forth, and back and forth. Imagine trying to read a technical manual with the eShades.
Do you wear glasses? Have you seen other people who wear them? Are they able to drink Dew? Or do their glasses fall off?
Take a look at the eShades, and note that they don't quite fit like normal eyeglasses and sunglasses. I can also guarantee that they weigh quite a bit more.
I think overall my impression is that eShades are being marketed as making your PC experience light, simple, and carefree, while in reality they'd get in the way and be a serious nuisance. I can't think of one advantage these offer over a decent 12"+ TFT screen. If they made a pair that simulate a 19" monitor with a high resolution, I'd be interested. But as the eShades stand, they are YACBUT. (Yet another cool but useless technology.)
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
I thought most audiophiles loathed CDs, instead opting for 1970's cutting edge in wax. And the ones that don't, believe that colouring the edge of a CD with a magical green marker improves the sound quality. This proves they know nothing about technology.:-)
You're right, of course, about the prices gradually dropping on products which sell consistently. If the $5000 laptops of three years ago hadn't sold fairly well, there wouldn't be $1000 laptops here today. But HUDs are such a niche (read: useless to >99% of the human population) technology that the "trickle-down" theory doesn't apply so easily.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
I don't get who would buy such things. Who has complaints about traditional monitors and laptop screens? "eShades" would quickly become an annoyance, as your eyes tire from the constant, radical focus shifts needed to glance back and forth between the screen, a book, the keyboard, et cetera. Not to mention the fact that they'd make it impossible to enjoy a cup of coffee. Or a soda; you tilt your head back to get the last few drops of Dew, and the glasses either fall off or make you dizzy.
About the only market segment who would find them useful are gamers, and gamers have no need for the slim, chic design that the eShades boast.
Let's get a few good laughs by reading their marketing BS:
eShades consume less than 1/4 of the power of a typical laptop display, so plugging eShades into your laptop and turning the laptop screen off can increase its battery-life by over 25%.
Because these glasses apparently make it difficult or impossible to read, write, or drink a beverage while using the computer (which I often do all at once while using a laptop), I really don't think a 25% power savings is worthwhile. Not to mention the fact that the only place I'd feel comfortable using such freaky glasses is in my home or office... where I have AC power anyway.
Holy shit, that must be some pretty hot tech to give me 800x600. I run 1024x768 on 15" monitors, for God's sake. On the "visual equivalent of a 19-inch desktop monitor", I expect a maximum resolution of no less than 1600x1200.
. ..their stylish, low-profile, ergonomic design make eShades look similar to popular sunglasses.
They'll probably sell a pair to this guy. And to a half dozen major corporations to make Powerpoint presentations "come alive". And they'll probably be bought in bulk by the Federal government for some obscure research project they want to waste taxpayer money on, and then pretty much fade away into LinuxOne-esque obscurity.
Timothy, that was a misleading story title. It sounds like the link has to do with 19" laptop screens, which would actually be useful.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
My worry is that after the exposure the DeCSS code has gotten, all large collections of hex will be mistaken as parts of subversive, illegal programming.
At least they can't take away octal.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
I wish they came with our B50's.:-) Yeah, a good keyboard like those IBMs is definitely soemthing to hold on to. The next time I see an IBM clicker in good condition, I'm snatching it up. I'm still kicking myself for not having bought one when you could still find them on IBM's website. (I'm going to spend a lot for a clicker, I want an IBM, not one of those Northgate copies.)
I think my Sun keyboard is getting jealous.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
Ever used a Sun? They're nice boxes. Nice doesn't come cheap.
But I agree with the sentiment. Every large corporation is money-grubbing. Sun and Oracle are just as bad as Microsoft , and if they were in Microsoft's position, would conduct the same unfair business practices. But since they're not monopolies (yet), they have no qualms about taking cheap shots at Redmond.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
If it's a BSD story, it should have the daemon icon. If it's an Apple story, don't use the BSD color scheme. I guess Hemos doesn't realize how this works, since Nik Dickintheass usually posts the BSD stories.
Everyone already knows that Darwin works on x86. And everyone also knows that this has absolutely no impact on Apple's business plan, and does not mean that OS X will run x86. It's also irrelevant because thereareseveral BSD-based systems which are much more worthy of x86 PC users' time.
Let's run through more facts that everyone should know. This has nothing to do with GNU/Linux or the GPL. It does not mean that Photoshop will work on FreeBSD. It doesn't mean that the Free Unix community will see an outpouring of money, code, or other support from Apple. All it means is that Apple decided to, for once, release a real operating system. They lack the talent to do so, as should be evident from MacOS 1 through 9. They found an excellent codebase, which, do to the wonderful BSD license, is essentially free (as in both pro bono and libre) for them to plunder however they wish. So they take twenty years of the best operating systems code ever written and, um, "embrace and extend" it with the GUI that Jobs brought with him from NeXT. Very "innovative". They then release this code, which allows Mac lusers run Photoshop without crashing, and allows them to get very rich with very little work.
Years of hard work and research from many real computer professionals associated with several projects across the country and around the world go to buy Mr. Jobs another few houses (hice?) and cars. Yay.
(And this, my friends, is flamebait. I love Fridays.)
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
I absolutely love books... spending too much money on books is my favorite hobby.;-) Especially computer books. But the library doesn't serve my needs adequately anymore. I get so much use out of my books that when I want a new one, I just buy it. The Border's across the street from work fulfills most of my needs, and Amazon.com, the rest.
But wait, this isn't about books... it's about computers. Computers with Internet access will make books obselete, and so I believe that one day public libraries will be little more than rows of blueberry iMacs. County governments will find them more cost effective; the Internet updates itself, for free. No more buying new encyclopedias. Want it on paper? Buy a laser printer too. As I said, I love books, and have bought many books fully knowing that the information contained within was available for free on the 'Net. But the library, as an research tool, shouldn't care about my personal preferences.
Fiction is another thing. Reading a novel online will suck. So the 'Net won't completely destroy the traditional image of the library. But the day will come when you can buy an electronic book reader. I envision them to be about the size of an Etch-a-Sketch, with a super-high resolution LCD that lets you read in the dark without straining your eyes. It will take "book cartridges" about the size of Game Boy games. And libraries will stock these, of course.
Censorship in libraries is a very important thing. Many of you think, "Who cares? I surf the net at home anyway.", but what about those who can't afford a PC, and do their research/newsreading at their local public library? Why should they have their opinions colored by government censorship? And the use of "censoring software" on a PC is stupid. If you don't want a child viewing pornography, use something called adult supervision. Just like the blocking software installed on home PCs, it's just an excuse for lazy parents.
If we let the government censor information today in public libraries, even under the guise of protecting the tender minds of young children, we shouldn't be the least bit surprised when the censorship starts getting worse in the future. I view these as the formative years in the next era of library technology, and we mustn't allow library censorship to shape the future of information access in the US. Everyone has the right to freedom of information, not just those with enough money to buy a personal computer.
Don't ignore these actions. It's wrong. You'll wake up one day, and discover PRC-type censorship everywhere, and wonder where it all started. This is where it started. Here, and now.
---------///---------- All generalizations are false.
Slashdot Mirror
The alternative is to send up my own satellite and carry around a backpack transmitter, so I can read Slashdot while in the Barnes & Noble on M Street.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Now when you say that, do you mean a subsitute that is "cheap ass[ed]", or an ass substitute that is cheap?
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Also, note that these are being marketed for use with laptops, to save power.
This brings up another point... when I'm using a PC (whether desktop or laptop), I've noticed that my eyes often flit away to other things in the room, on my desk, et cetera. I imagine this helps reduce eyestrain considerably. But when using the eShades, you don't have much else to look at but the screen. And if you do, it's a significantly shift in focus from something that's an inch in front of your eyes to a several feet, and back and forth, and back and forth. Imagine trying to read a technical manual with the eShades.
Take a look at the eShades, and note that they don't quite fit like normal eyeglasses and sunglasses. I can also guarantee that they weigh quite a bit more.I think overall my impression is that eShades are being marketed as making your PC experience light, simple, and carefree, while in reality they'd get in the way and be a serious nuisance. I can't think of one advantage these offer over a decent 12"+ TFT screen. If they made a pair that simulate a 19" monitor with a high resolution, I'd be interested. But as the eShades stand, they are YACBUT. (Yet another cool but useless technology.)
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
You're right, of course, about the prices gradually dropping on products which sell consistently. If the $5000 laptops of three years ago hadn't sold fairly well, there wouldn't be $1000 laptops here today. But HUDs are such a niche (read: useless to >99% of the human population) technology that the "trickle-down" theory doesn't apply so easily.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
About the only market segment who would find them useful are gamers, and gamers have no need for the slim, chic design that the eShades boast.
Let's get a few good laughs by reading their marketing BS:
Because these glasses apparently make it difficult or impossible to read, write, or drink a beverage while using the computer (which I often do all at once while using a laptop), I really don't think a 25% power savings is worthwhile. Not to mention the fact that the only place I'd feel comfortable using such freaky glasses is in my home or office... where I have AC power anyway.
Holy shit, that must be some pretty hot tech to give me 800x600. I run 1024x768 on 15" monitors, for God's sake. On the "visual equivalent of a 19-inch desktop monitor", I expect a maximum resolution of no less than 1600x1200.
I guess I don't get out too much. I had no idea that today's popular sunglasses made people look like Geordi Laforge (sp?) with a hearing aid.
They'll probably sell a pair to this guy. And to a half dozen major corporations to make Powerpoint presentations "come alive". And they'll probably be bought in bulk by the Federal government for some obscure research project they want to waste taxpayer money on, and then pretty much fade away into LinuxOne-esque obscurity.
Timothy, that was a misleading story title. It sounds like the link has to do with 19" laptop screens, which would actually be useful.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
At least they can't take away octal.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
...
Okay, I hope I'm not the only one that thought that said "nipple telegraph".
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
I think my Sun keyboard is getting jealous.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
But I agree with the sentiment. Every large corporation is money-grubbing. Sun and Oracle are just as bad as Microsoft , and if they were in Microsoft's position, would conduct the same unfair business practices. But since they're not monopolies (yet), they have no qualms about taking cheap shots at Redmond.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
Everyone already knows that Darwin works on x86. And everyone also knows that this has absolutely no impact on Apple's business plan, and does not mean that OS X will run x86. It's also irrelevant because there are several BSD-based systems which are much more worthy of x86 PC users' time.
Let's run through more facts that everyone should know. This has nothing to do with GNU/Linux or the GPL. It does not mean that Photoshop will work on FreeBSD. It doesn't mean that the Free Unix community will see an outpouring of money, code, or other support from Apple. All it means is that Apple decided to, for once, release a real operating system. They lack the talent to do so, as should be evident from MacOS 1 through 9. They found an excellent codebase, which, do to the wonderful BSD license, is essentially free (as in both pro bono and libre) for them to plunder however they wish. So they take twenty years of the best operating systems code ever written and, um, "embrace and extend" it with the GUI that Jobs brought with him from NeXT. Very "innovative". They then release this code, which allows Mac lusers run Photoshop without crashing, and allows them to get very rich with very little work.
Years of hard work and research from many real computer professionals associated with several projects across the country and around the world go to buy Mr. Jobs another few houses (hice?) and cars. Yay.
(And this, my friends, is flamebait. I love Fridays.)
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
. . .
Those bastards.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
I absolutely love books... spending too much money on books is my favorite hobby. ;-) Especially computer books. But the library doesn't serve my needs adequately anymore. I get so much use out of my books that when I want a new one, I just buy it. The Border's across the street from work fulfills most of my needs, and Amazon.com, the rest.
But wait, this isn't about books... it's about computers. Computers with Internet access will make books obselete, and so I believe that one day public libraries will be little more than rows of blueberry iMacs. County governments will find them more cost effective; the Internet updates itself, for free. No more buying new encyclopedias. Want it on paper? Buy a laser printer too. As I said, I love books, and have bought many books fully knowing that the information contained within was available for free on the 'Net. But the library, as an research tool, shouldn't care about my personal preferences.
Fiction is another thing. Reading a novel online will suck. So the 'Net won't completely destroy the traditional image of the library. But the day will come when you can buy an electronic book reader. I envision them to be about the size of an Etch-a-Sketch, with a super-high resolution LCD that lets you read in the dark without straining your eyes. It will take "book cartridges" about the size of Game Boy games. And libraries will stock these, of course.
Censorship in libraries is a very important thing. Many of you think, "Who cares? I surf the net at home anyway.", but what about those who can't afford a PC, and do their research/newsreading at their local public library? Why should they have their opinions colored by government censorship? And the use of "censoring software" on a PC is stupid. If you don't want a child viewing pornography, use something called adult supervision. Just like the blocking software installed on home PCs, it's just an excuse for lazy parents.
If we let the government censor information today in public libraries, even under the guise of protecting the tender minds of young children, we shouldn't be the least bit surprised when the censorship starts getting worse in the future. I view these as the formative years in the next era of library technology, and we mustn't allow library censorship to shape the future of information access in the US. Everyone has the right to freedom of information, not just those with enough money to buy a personal computer.
Don't ignore these actions. It's wrong. You'll wake up one day, and discover PRC-type censorship everywhere, and wonder where it all started. This is where it started. Here, and now.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.