OS/2 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows applications while Windows was a $100 way of running Windows applications. It didn't matter that OS/2 was better, it wasn't (in the minds of most consumers) $400 better, especially when it needed $400 more RAM as well.
Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps. And compared to XP, Vista also needed $400 worth of hardware.
Depressing proof that it's all in the marketing.
But the $100 option meant you couldn't have "Team OS/2" in your Usenet signature.
True, but there may be a technical element to this. As in: I don't subscribe to any TV service, but I still get all the channels of "Basic Plus" cable. Try plugging your cable into the back of a TV sometime and see what you get. My understanding is that they have to put filters on your line to block the TV once they turn the line live with Internet service, and a lot of installers can't be bothered.
When I signed up with Adelphia I was told that the internet only option came with the basic cable channels. They didn't block any channels for years. After having numerous techs out to fix a network issue, they tried to tell me that I could not hook the cable up to the TV. After much bickering they agreed that I could but trapped out the higher channels. Then Comcast acquired Adelphia and filtered all the channels as well as shutting down my Adelphia email address and several other things even though they said they would not. If I had another reasonable option like Fios I'd switch in a heartbeat.
You can not tell a camera's electronics from a cell phone's electronics. None of this stuff can be distinguished on Xray. Even a cam embedded in a laptop can't be distinguished from the other electronics in the device.
They see your cell when you go thru the scanner (you put the phone in the basket before going thru).
They have been trained to look for cameras built into computer bezels (even tho 98% of them face the computer user, not the courtroom).
They do it with eyeballs, not Xrays.
Granted this was several years ago, and I can't speak for computers, but yes they could tell the difference between camera and non-camera phones. At a court house I used to go to on a daily basis I noticed that every time someone placed their cell phone in the bin to go through the x-ray (or maybe it's something else) scanner no one was looking at them prior to entry and they were picking out the camera phones when looking at the scanner screen. Since I was on good terms with the police at this location I asked about it. They told me that they could see the CCD sensor in a camera phone and showed me the difference. Like I said this was several years ago, so I don't know if this still holds true or not but it at least used to be the case.
I have a 1/4 inch drill bit that can disable any camera in any device in minutes, and I think that any security guard would be able to see that it would never work again.
The problem is that in most of the courthouses and high security facilities I've been in don't determine whether or not there is a camera in a device by simply visually inspecting it. They figure it out by seeing the camera electronics in an x-ray. If this is present then the general rule is that it is not allowed through regardless of the optics or it being disabled. Honestly I can see why as it wouldn't take much to make something that would allow you to simply swap out the bad optics for ones that work once inside the facility.
I get a kick out of the vendors that have been running control and acquisition systems on bulletproof UNIX boxes forever and now they're switching Windows XP but *leaving* the Motif user interfaces in place.
Me too. It makes me wonder how much of it is laziness and how much is to keep the technologists/IT people from having enough comfort to start messing around with it too much.
Then the hospitals all complain because the in-house IT generally only understand MS, so they will have to pay for even the simplistic things.
I work for a medical software company and we had a program that ran on Linux only for a long time. We eventually ported it to Windows because the majority of the support calls required an on site visit since no one in IT support was willing and/or able to touch a Linux box. Several times I went to sites and the only problem would be that the hard disk was full and they simply needed to delete some old/unneeded data.
what part of 10 year old equipment didn't you understand? What part of Win NT and win 2K makes you think the hardware can even run anything newer?
At that time your looking at Red Hat 5. think about it. linux wasn't ready back then for mission critical stuff.
At best they could have gone with OS/2 warp.
Actually Solaris was pretty popular for MRI scanners back then. GE eventually switched to Linux which they currently use. Siemens and Phillips went with Windows.
The places I've worked on imaging systems, the virus solution was simple: they didn't run Windows, or MacOS, or even Linux.
Then I'd guess you never worked in an environment that had an MRI scanner because ALL of the major vendors use either Linux or Windows to run the control consoles for the magnet.
Your analogy reverses the order of events... "overspent consistently while shopping" equates to the recent economic stimulus, and the drunken weekend in Vegas equates to the fraudulent war and the resulting oil price shock. You're right...the latter is much more dire, and one should be upset, though.
If the graphic run by the Washington post is remotely accurate I'd say not. Here's a link to it re-posted by the Heritage Foundation (Yeah I know, they're about as right-wing as you can get but unless you have a subscription to the Washington Post you cant see it there) http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/ It's showing the deficit from 2000 through 2008 and the White House projected deficit spending from 2009 through 2019. The highest deficit during the Bush term was during 2008 at just under $500 billion and 2007 was around $200 billion at it's lowest. The White House projected deficit for 2009 is $1.75 trillion and should steadily decrease to $600 billion by the end of president Obama's first term if all goes as planned. So be the war fraudulent or otherwise, it was still cheaper than what appears to be ahead of us. I can only hope that we aren't going to lose the farm in Vegas.
And seriously, what's with the "oil price shock" comment? When the US invaded Iraq it was supposedly to steal their oil so we could have cheap gas. When that didn't happen the prices went up a few years later because we invaded Iraq. Then the prices plummeted last year because, what, it snowed in Iraq.
clinton had the budget balanced and in a yearly surplus by the end of his two terms
Well from '92 to 97 he added an additional $639 billion to the national debt. Yes he actually had a surplus of $63 billion in `97, however the dept was still $3.7 trillion. In '98 there was a surplus of $124 billion vs. a debt of $3.6 trillion and a surplus of $232 billion in 2000 vs. a debt of $3.4 trillion. All told he removed $419 billion from the national debt and added $639 for a net of $220 billion added to the national debt during his time in office.
He did not eliminate the national debt like this is too often represented as. If we could have kept the budget the same until 2014, then this would have eliminated the national debt. But the bulk of the debt was still there when he left office. Of course then 9-11-2001 happened and spending went out of control again. Maybe a few extra billion to the intelligence agencies from '97 to 2000 could have avoided this, probably not, but we'll never know.
From a secret launch site in the Florida Everglades, with a really big trebuchet. They are rounding up alligators as we speak, to fill the counterweight basket. It's gonna take a lot of gators!
It'll only take 1/6th as many alligators as you'd normally need though.
Re:Now we need a robotic shark....
on
Robotic Penguins
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
(frickin' laser sold separately).
Which is a good thing since at 1:37 they discuss the He penguins and claim "A micro-controller gives the penguins free will to explore this space"
Armed machines with free will never turns out to be a good thing for humans in the movies.
The use of "degrees" was dropped when measuring temperatures in Kelvin sometime in the late 1960's. E.g. 5 degrees Fahrenheit would be expressed as 258 Kelvin or 258 K.
Ok...so which state will the taxes be going to? The state in which the business operates out of, or the state in which the purchase was made in, or both?
That's a good question. If it's the state of the purchaser, then I suspect that Delaware could end up becoming a popular place to live, or at least claim residence. Oregon would be a more interesting question since the sales tax is set on a local level rather than by the state. If it's the state of the seller, then there could be incentive to set up call centers to receive orders in either of those states, or perhaps even Montana as it probably has the lowest sales tax of states that have it.
You don't like the fact *AA cronies now occupy the highest offices in the land? Instead of hitting iTunes and Netflix for your entertainment needs, close your wallet and head on over to The Pirate Bay. Change happens when people are pushed over the edge and many famous instances of civil disobedience proves it.
How many acts of "civil disobedience" occur a year (in a similar manner to the one you describe) against prohibition *cough* I mean the war on drugs? How's that been working out?
Anyway taxing smokers is smart, because smokers have health problems that taxpayers end up subsidizing through medicare/medicaid. Raising taxes on smokers results in fewer smokers, which results in a lower tax burden for nonsmokers. This is one where the "lower my taxes" crowd should be creaming their jeans, and instead they're whining about it.
Actually you're wrong. A non-smoker on average costs more over their life in medical costs than a smoker. Sure smokers get cancer and emphysema, but the treatments are fairly straight forward for these and usually a smoker dies much younger. Non-smokers tend to get more exotic/costly diseases and in the end cost the tax payers more.
Perhaps we can launch all of the coal and oil on the planet into the sun as well. That should speed along the technology for the use of magic pixie dust for generation of electricity.
Never has the gravity of an accident (of any kind) been so exaggerated. Before or after.
If by exaggerated you mean covered up then yes I agree. But speaking as someone who lived in the area during that time and in high school afterward, I have to disagree. I truly find it surprising that for the most part the typical paranoid, conspiracy minded, "down with the man", tin foil hat wearing slashdotter who questions every official story will lap up the NRC reports on TMI like a kitten drinking a saucer of milk.
I personally knew people who were employees at the plant during the accident that were dying of cancer and were well paid for their silence. Don't get me wrong, I fully support the use of nuclear power. It has certainly killed way less people than coal or oil have. But to say that TMI was exaggerated or that no one was harmed is just plain naive.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course, Vista and 7 tried to be a $500 way of running Windows apps, while XP was a $100 way of running Windows apps. And compared to XP, Vista also needed $400 worth of hardware.
Depressing proof that it's all in the marketing.
But the $100 option meant you couldn't have "Team OS/2" in your Usenet signature.
I never would have expected fakes to outnumber genuine articles in a status driven market with poor verification.
I never thought it possible but this could be a niche market to rival audiophile products in regards to fraud.
True, but there may be a technical element to this. As in: I don't subscribe to any TV service, but I still get all the channels of "Basic Plus" cable. Try plugging your cable into the back of a TV sometime and see what you get. My understanding is that they have to put filters on your line to block the TV once they turn the line live with Internet service, and a lot of installers can't be bothered.
When I signed up with Adelphia I was told that the internet only option came with the basic cable channels. They didn't block any channels for years. After having numerous techs out to fix a network issue, they tried to tell me that I could not hook the cable up to the TV. After much bickering they agreed that I could but trapped out the higher channels. Then Comcast acquired Adelphia and filtered all the channels as well as shutting down my Adelphia email address and several other things even though they said they would not. If I had another reasonable option like Fios I'd switch in a heartbeat.
Ah, not, that's not true.
You can not tell a camera's electronics from a cell phone's electronics. None of this stuff can be distinguished on Xray. Even a cam embedded in a laptop can't be distinguished from the other electronics in the device.
They see your cell when you go thru the scanner (you put the phone in the basket before going thru).
They have been trained to look for cameras built into computer bezels (even tho 98% of them face the computer user, not the courtroom).
They do it with eyeballs, not Xrays.
Granted this was several years ago, and I can't speak for computers, but yes they could tell the difference between camera and non-camera phones. At a court house I used to go to on a daily basis I noticed that every time someone placed their cell phone in the bin to go through the x-ray (or maybe it's something else) scanner no one was looking at them prior to entry and they were picking out the camera phones when looking at the scanner screen. Since I was on good terms with the police at this location I asked about it. They told me that they could see the CCD sensor in a camera phone and showed me the difference. Like I said this was several years ago, so I don't know if this still holds true or not but it at least used to be the case.
I have a 1/4 inch drill bit that can disable any camera in any device in minutes, and I think that any security guard would be able to see that it would never work again.
The problem is that in most of the courthouses and high security facilities I've been in don't determine whether or not there is a camera in a device by simply visually inspecting it. They figure it out by seeing the camera electronics in an x-ray. If this is present then the general rule is that it is not allowed through regardless of the optics or it being disabled. Honestly I can see why as it wouldn't take much to make something that would allow you to simply swap out the bad optics for ones that work once inside the facility.
I get a kick out of the vendors that have been running control and acquisition systems on bulletproof UNIX boxes forever and now they're switching Windows XP but *leaving* the Motif user interfaces in place.
Me too. It makes me wonder how much of it is laziness and how much is to keep the technologists/IT people from having enough comfort to start messing around with it too much.
Shouldn't they be using OpenBSD, then?
Then the hospitals all complain because the in-house IT generally only understand MS, so they will have to pay for even the simplistic things.
I work for a medical software company and we had a program that ran on Linux only for a long time. We eventually ported it to Windows because the majority of the support calls required an on site visit since no one in IT support was willing and/or able to touch a Linux box. Several times I went to sites and the only problem would be that the hard disk was full and they simply needed to delete some old/unneeded data.
what part of 10 year old equipment didn't you understand? What part of Win NT and win 2K makes you think the hardware can even run anything newer?
At that time your looking at Red Hat 5. think about it. linux wasn't ready back then for mission critical stuff.
At best they could have gone with OS/2 warp.
Actually Solaris was pretty popular for MRI scanners back then. GE eventually switched to Linux which they currently use. Siemens and Phillips went with Windows.
The places I've worked on imaging systems, the virus solution was simple: they didn't run Windows, or MacOS, or even Linux.
Then I'd guess you never worked in an environment that had an MRI scanner because ALL of the major vendors use either Linux or Windows to run the control consoles for the magnet.
People forget that he was the guy that got international relations to a point where not even Ronnie Raygun could restart the cold war.
Be that as it may. Carter also slashed the hell out of NASA's budget forcing them to abandon all kinds of cool stuff.
Your analogy reverses the order of events... "overspent consistently while shopping" equates to the recent economic stimulus, and the drunken weekend in Vegas equates to the fraudulent war and the resulting oil price shock. You're right...the latter is much more dire, and one should be upset, though.
If the graphic run by the Washington post is remotely accurate I'd say not. Here's a link to it re-posted by the Heritage Foundation (Yeah I know, they're about as right-wing as you can get but unless you have a subscription to the Washington Post you cant see it there)
http://blog.heritage.org/2009/03/24/bush-deficit-vs-obama-deficit-in-pictures/ It's showing the deficit from 2000 through 2008 and the White House projected deficit spending from 2009 through 2019. The highest deficit during the Bush term was during 2008 at just under $500 billion and 2007 was around $200 billion at it's lowest. The White House projected deficit for 2009 is $1.75 trillion and should steadily decrease to $600 billion by the end of president Obama's first term if all goes as planned. So be the war fraudulent or otherwise, it was still cheaper than what appears to be ahead of us. I can only hope that we aren't going to lose the farm in Vegas.
And seriously, what's with the "oil price shock" comment? When the US invaded Iraq it was supposedly to steal their oil so we could have cheap gas. When that didn't happen the prices went up a few years later because we invaded Iraq. Then the prices plummeted last year because, what, it snowed in Iraq.
all five?
clinton had the budget balanced and in a yearly surplus by the end of his two terms
Well from '92 to 97 he added an additional $639 billion to the national debt. Yes he actually had a surplus of $63 billion in `97, however the dept was still $3.7 trillion. In '98 there was a surplus of $124 billion vs. a debt of $3.6 trillion and a surplus of $232 billion in 2000 vs. a debt of $3.4 trillion. All told he removed $419 billion from the national debt and added $639 for a net of $220 billion added to the national debt during his time in office.
He did not eliminate the national debt like this is too often represented as. If we could have kept the budget the same until 2014, then this would have eliminated the national debt. But the bulk of the debt was still there when he left office. Of course then 9-11-2001 happened and spending went out of control again. Maybe a few extra billion to the intelligence agencies from '97 to 2000 could have avoided this, probably not, but we'll never know.
http://books.google.com/books?id=55ghk_xYpToC&pg=PA827&lpg=PA827&dq=clinton+plan+time+table+eliminate+the+deficit&source=bl&ots=rprz2W-AyS&sig=O42gPkNF7WtaPJ4mehgcRAocOcI&hl=en&ei=dlr2SbaJH8OEtwfc_62nDw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2#PPA828,M1
Or did the wrong people get put in charge?
Yes, Jimmy Carter.
From a secret launch site in the Florida Everglades, with a really big trebuchet. They are rounding up alligators as we speak, to fill the counterweight basket. It's gonna take a lot of gators!
It'll only take 1/6th as many alligators as you'd normally need though.
(frickin' laser sold separately).
Which is a good thing since at 1:37 they discuss the He penguins and claim "A micro-controller gives the penguins free will to explore this space"
Armed machines with free will never turns out to be a good thing for humans in the movies.
Pretending to be writing from the year 2025
In the year twenty twenty-five if Intel is still alive. If Microsoft can survive they may find...
Real tempeature is degrees Kelvin.
The use of "degrees" was dropped when measuring temperatures in Kelvin sometime in the late 1960's. E.g. 5 degrees Fahrenheit would be expressed as 258 Kelvin or 258 K.
Yup. A torture victim will tell his torturers anything!
For example, that 2+2=5.
There... Are... Four... Lights!
Ok...so which state will the taxes be going to? The state in which the business operates out of, or the state in which the purchase was made in, or both?
That's a good question. If it's the state of the purchaser, then I suspect that Delaware could end up becoming a popular place to live, or at least claim residence. Oregon would be a more interesting question since the sales tax is set on a local level rather than by the state. If it's the state of the seller, then there could be incentive to set up call centers to receive orders in either of those states, or perhaps even Montana as it probably has the lowest sales tax of states that have it.
Oxymoron of the century.
I guess you never heard of "Military Intelligence".
You don't like the fact *AA cronies now occupy the highest offices in the land? Instead of hitting iTunes and Netflix for your entertainment needs, close your wallet and head on over to The Pirate Bay. Change happens when people are pushed over the edge and many famous instances of civil disobedience proves it.
How many acts of "civil disobedience" occur a year (in a similar manner to the one you describe) against prohibition *cough* I mean the war on drugs? How's that been working out?
Anyway taxing smokers is smart, because smokers have health problems that taxpayers end up subsidizing through medicare/medicaid. Raising taxes on smokers results in fewer smokers, which results in a lower tax burden for nonsmokers. This is one where the "lower my taxes" crowd should be creaming their jeans, and instead they're whining about it.
Actually you're wrong. A non-smoker on average costs more over their life in medical costs than a smoker. Sure smokers get cancer and emphysema, but the treatments are fairly straight forward for these and usually a smoker dies much younger. Non-smokers tend to get more exotic/costly diseases and in the end cost the tax payers more.
This has been known for some time as this was published in 1997: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/337/15/1052
There have been more recent studies that back this up published out of Holland and at least one other European country in the last year or so.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22995659/
Just launch them into the Sun.
Perhaps we can launch all of the coal and oil on the planet into the sun as well. That should speed along the technology for the use of magic pixie dust for generation of electricity.
Never has the gravity of an accident (of any kind) been so exaggerated. Before or after.
If by exaggerated you mean covered up then yes I agree. But speaking as someone who lived in the area during that time and in high school afterward, I have to disagree. I truly find it surprising that for the most part the typical paranoid, conspiracy minded, "down with the man", tin foil hat wearing slashdotter who questions every official story will lap up the NRC reports on TMI like a kitten drinking a saucer of milk.
I personally knew people who were employees at the plant during the accident that were dying of cancer and were well paid for their silence. Don't get me wrong, I fully support the use of nuclear power. It has certainly killed way less people than coal or oil have. But to say that TMI was exaggerated or that no one was harmed is just plain naive.
Dude, the 1950s are calling you. Secretaries don't fetch coffee.
Dude, the 1970's are calling you. The politically correct title for secretaries is administrative assistant now.