The problem lies with Reverse Polish Notation. TI calculators take equations in the same way you would write them out if you were going to work it by hand. HPs don't, requiring the user to learn a whole new style of grammar.
I was a math tutor, not a calculator tutor, and the rare HP calculators I encountered were an obstacle to me doing my job, namely helping people learn math.
Imagine if proper spoken english was the same as it is today but proper written english was in the style of Yoda. Now imagine that was true for only a select subset of the population (say, auto mechanics). Now imagine trying to teach that to an auto mechanic and explaining why they need to write that way...
To put it another way, it's like trying to read legalese. I'm sure it's fine for some things (although I have my doubts), but it's simply no good for newspaper articles.
Your comment makes it obvious that you are ignorant on the subject. If you're going to flame someone, I would suggest you try having some actual knowledge to back yourself up with.
...sticking with metric units! Then they wouldn't have to pay people to screw up the conversions, and less expensive scientific equipment would accidentally crash into planets (crashing into them on purpose is OK, and shouldn't necessarily be discouraged).
Don't get me wrong, my truck gets about 285 Leagues to the Oxhaft and that's the way I like it, and I love NASA and what they do, but honestly, this is a scientific organization. What the hell are they doing using "standard" measurements?!?
Having more than one version available gives more options to people and allows for several niche distros of *nix.
Good point I suppose, but I don't see how it would be prevented by having only Linux.
Honestly, what options are you missing in Linux? And of those, how many couldn't be available within a year if somebody threw some resources at them?
Linux already serves most niche markets, be it server, desktop, embedded, supercomputing, etc. That's the beauty of it, because of it's open source nature it can be all things to all people, and the lessons learned by one niche percolate through to the others, thereby improving the whole.
Linux is not a single entity like AIX (for example), and I think it is inappropriate to think of it in those terms. Linux is not a business.
That said though, I think BSD will always be around, for the same reasons Linux will be, regardless of success or failure to grab marketshare.
Sadly, my grandma passed away before I got to introduce here to Linux, but my mom didn't have any trouble when she finally upgraded to the digital age (her previous word processing platform was a typewriter, 1920s Royale as I recall). The next least technical people I know (my wife and sister) also didn't had any problems. My sister actually thinks it's easier to use than Windows, although she was working the front desk at VA so she didn't have to worry about her printer not working (that's been my only headache with Linux).
Having recently migrated to Win2k at work and SuSE 7.1 at home, I have to say that the windows migration was much more of a hassle. Strangely, most of the problems I had with Win2k were due to lack of drivers. (I still haven't been able to get our plotter working, but at least our CAD software doesn't crash 5 times a day anymore).
Is the company trying to take advantage of ignorant consumers that don't know any better, or are technophobic?"
Well, yeah. Of course they are. That's why I don't own one and have disuaded everyone I know who has considered purchasing one.
I did realize that the poster was refering to stereo component CD burners, but only after I had submited my own post. However, I stand by my assertion that they are being ripped off, and simply change my reasons for saying it.
First, I don't know where you've been buying your CD-Rs, but you are getting ripped off. It's been years since I've paid more than $.30 each.
Second, the idea that you have to buy special "Music" CD-Rs is total BS. Consumer electronics have problems with open CD-RWs (my burner is write only, so I'm not familiar with the -RW particulars) and multisession CD-Rs. I've been copying, mixing, etc to regular old cheap CD-Rs for years now and I've never had a problem playing them. I don't use multi-session and I always close the disc. Of course, I do all this on a PC, so I don't know how things work with those consumer CD copiers.
Third, I was going to post about the "pc-friendliness" of DVDs as well. Gladiator came with software on it that it urgently told me I absolutely had to install or I wouldn't be able to watch the movie. Against my better judgement I installed it. It was the crappiest DVD playing software I have ever tried. Playback was choppy and full of artifacts, which on my system (Athlon 750,384M RAM, GeForce2 GTS, SB Live! Platinum) is totally unacceptable. In fact, I got better playback on my old K6-2 with a TNT1.
Sorry if this sounds sort of flame-ish. I'm out of coffee...
They're probably run by the same folks, but the web hosting guys can claim that the porn site is somebody else capitalising on the typo. Not a bad idea, really.
This seems much easier than going to the MS website, hunting down all the latest upgrades, installing patches for all the seperate bits and pieces, having patches for one app kill half the rest, and ending up with your MS box in tatters...
The part I liked best was when I went to update MS Office to SR2, and it told me I had to install all the SR1 patches first, and when I went to do that it told me I had to have an SR1 CD. "But I upgraded to SR1 online!", I said, "Isn't my SR0 CD enough for you?". When I gave up and ejected the CD I noticed it said SR1 on it...
All it would take for me to buy something from them is dropping the One-Click Patent. Given that the people who are bothered by it are the people most likely to buy stuff online, it seems to me that it would be a sound business strategy.
I use a good monitors that will support 1280x1024@75Hz or better
The monitors we were using were equal to or better than that, but they still won't handle 1080i. Because of the letterbox aspect ratio, the operating resolution is 1920x1080. There are monitors that will handle that, but they're not within my price range yet...
There are something like 18 different standards that fall with the broad heading of HDTV, so I have to warn you that your description is a little simplified. I wish it were that simple, but the FCC has decided to let the market work it out, so it's about as standardized as DVD burners.
I used to test/troubleshoot profesional video equipment. Until I actually saw it I couldn't care less about HDTV. The problem is that true HDTV runs at 1920x1080 (as I recall). Why is that a problem? Because most monitors won't do that.
Most of our test bays used standard computer monitors for output, we ran the signal the signal through a box that stepped down the resolution. I still looked sweet, but it was nothing compared to watching the same signal on a real HDTV monitor.
Granted, most HDTV broadcasts will be at one of the lower resolution standards, so it probably won't matter that much...
WARNING: Browse the 'us2you.com' sites at your own risk. Porn pop-ups abound.
You mean ustoyou.com, us2you.com seems to be a domain registry service (they do have a cool mouse-over-controlled spinning cube, though it doesn't seem to have any real purpose other than being cool), and has some link to some interesting (at first glance) space/scifi sites.
ustoyou.com is just porn pop-ups (including one really annoying one I had to Ctrl-Alt-Del to get rid of), there doesn't seem to be any actual content.
there needs to be a better way of addressing the needs of end-user software users than telling them to write code.
I have one problem with this statement, and that is the use of the word "need". It treats Linux like a business, which it isn't. SuSE and Red Hat are businesses, and if you're looking for somewhere to suggest features, those are likely excellent places to start. I suppose that would be the third option to the two I mentioned before. It would certainly be nice to have a better way to address the needs of the average user. I would love to see a site where I could donate money for a feature, and other people who wanted that same feature could donate also, until the project is worth enough for someone to take it on. I recall an article on/. a while back that brought up this idea, and I have seen developer sites with messages posted to the effect of "I will pay someone $3000 if they can add [feature] to [project]" (unfortunately I can't remember where I saw that and I haven't run across anything like it recently).
I would even be interested in starting a site to do this from, but I don't have the resources to do it myself. Initial investment would include a server(s) that can at least pretend to handle the initial slashdoting when the service is opened, and some cash to open an account with a descent interest rate. My plan is this: the donations are made by [check, credit card, paypal, whatever] and held in this interest bearing account. When a project is completed, the triumphant coder get's a check equal to the donations and the site keeps the interest to cover overhead. Will it work? I don't know. It depends on how popular the service becomes. Worst case would be that people don't choose to use it, next worst is the site has to take a small percentage of the reward to help cover costs.
I worked for a company a while back that was a facilitator for 1031 delayed exchanges for aircraft, exchange meaning trade for like item, like trading one plane for another (you could also do this with houses and other big ticket items). The delayed exchange allowed you to sell the plane and keep that money tax free for the purchase of another plane within a year (as I recall, I was just doing data entry). The money had to be held in escrow by a third party (the facilitator) in order for it to be tax free, but the facilitator requirement was removed a few years ago. This particular company's fee was one quarter of one percent (.25%) of the amount held.
We wouldn't need office space, as the servers could be in my house (my lines are capable of 6M DSL, but my wallet isn't:( , another reason I can't go it alone on this). If anyone's seriously interested in something like this, drop me a line. I read all responses to my/. posts, the email above is valid (save/.'s anti-spam mangling) and the link on my user page will give you my daytime phone number (ask for Pete). If you'd rather steal my idea and do it yourself, go for it. All I ask is that you send a thank you my way, it doesn't even have to be publicly acknowledged.
I would love to see Linux dominate the desktop as well, and that's where my fledgling hacking skills are aimed. The "code it yourself" response is a direct result of so many coming to open source expecting to get something for nothing. That isn't what it's about, a contribution is still required for everything to work smoothly, but that contribution doesn't have to be monetary. I haven't seen the statement that "linux is only free if your time is worthless" lately, but it's still equally valid.
what if this guy, like countless others who might have an interest in using open source, DON'T FUCKING WRITE CODE?
I know there are countless users of open source software that don't write code, I'm one of them. I realized that I had 2 choices when it came to getting Linux to do exactly what I want, either find someone who can code and get them to do the work, or learn to code and do it myself. I chose to learn to code, so I bought some books and I'm struggling through it. Sure it's tiresome to hear "write it yourself", but it's more tiresome to hear people bitching about something that's being given to them for free! I'm tired of listening to all these pathetic whiners saying "why'd they do it that way or not do it this way and why doesn't it have this feature..." The vast majority of the code is produced by people working on their own time and for their own reasons, and they provide their code to the rest of the world for free just because they are cool guys. They certainly don't do it to support a bunch of 1337 h4x0rs whos only contribution to the community is spewing flames at Windows users!
I'm not suggesting that you or the other guy are that bad, but Christ, show some fucking gratitude when somebody gives you something!
Re:and people say windows is bloated
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
I carried a floppy with Tom's Root Boot on it around with me at my last job just to see what I could get it to boot on (we made digital video equipment, which was all x86 for top level control), but I seem to have misplaced it since then. A google search for Tiny Linux turns up plentyu of good link for this kind of stuff. The card CD seems like a really cool idea.
I beleive it was win98 (not SE) he was trimming. Another poster in this thread claims 30MB with win95.
Re:SuSE has done this for a while...
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
There's the small issue of getting the system you're installing on to recognize the source path. Since I've never done it before, it probably seems like a bigger problem than it really is...
Why don't you take the code and integrate it with KDE or Gnome yourself? You have the itch, scratch it. All the tools and a big pile of source code are there. Welcome to Open Source!
Mozilla is not just a browser. The purpose of Mozilla is to provide a higher quality software base for the Netscape Communications Suite, that's why the Mozilla source was opened in the first place. A communications suite certainly has need of a calendar app, and therefore this third party add-on does add value to the Mozilla package.
It wasn't given to KDE or Gnome directly because it wasn't designed for KDE or Gnome. And why would it be? OEone is a company, and companies want their product to be available to the maximum number of people possible. Mozilla targets almost 100% of desktops, more than any other software I know of. KDE is used on maybe 1% of desktops. I don't think it's any mystery why a company would design their software to work with Mozilla rather than KDE.
It was extremely gracious and generous of OEone to release the source to their code. It is a gift to the community! We should say thank you, and if it isn't useful to you, either do the work to make it useful or shut the hell up.
If this is the kind of attitude companies are met with when they decide to open their source code, is it any wonder so many companies don't?
Re:and people say windows is bloated
on
Debian On DVD
·
· Score: 2
A friend of mine claims he can trim windows down to ~75MB. It won't do anything, of course...
Slashdot Mirror
I was a math tutor, not a calculator tutor, and the rare HP calculators I encountered were an obstacle to me doing my job, namely helping people learn math.
Imagine if proper spoken english was the same as it is today but proper written english was in the style of Yoda. Now imagine that was true for only a select subset of the population (say, auto mechanics). Now imagine trying to teach that to an auto mechanic and explaining why they need to write that way...
To put it another way, it's like trying to read legalese. I'm sure it's fine for some things (although I have my doubts), but it's simply no good for newspaper articles.
Your comment makes it obvious that you are ignorant on the subject. If you're going to flame someone, I would suggest you try having some actual knowledge to back yourself up with.
Don't get me wrong, my truck gets about 285 Leagues to the Oxhaft and that's the way I like it, and I love NASA and what they do, but honestly, this is a scientific organization. What the hell are they doing using "standard" measurements?!?
Good point I suppose, but I don't see how it would be prevented by having only Linux.
Honestly, what options are you missing in Linux? And of those, how many couldn't be available within a year if somebody threw some resources at them?
Linux already serves most niche markets, be it server, desktop, embedded, supercomputing, etc. That's the beauty of it, because of it's open source nature it can be all things to all people, and the lessons learned by one niche percolate through to the others, thereby improving the whole.
Linux is not a single entity like AIX (for example), and I think it is inappropriate to think of it in those terms. Linux is not a business.
That said though, I think BSD will always be around, for the same reasons Linux will be, regardless of success or failure to grab marketshare.
Sadly, my grandma passed away before I got to introduce here to Linux, but my mom didn't have any trouble when she finally upgraded to the digital age (her previous word processing platform was a typewriter, 1920s Royale as I recall). The next least technical people I know (my wife and sister) also didn't had any problems. My sister actually thinks it's easier to use than Windows, although she was working the front desk at VA so she didn't have to worry about her printer not working (that's been my only headache with Linux).
Having recently migrated to Win2k at work and SuSE 7.1 at home, I have to say that the windows migration was much more of a hassle. Strangely, most of the problems I had with Win2k were due to lack of drivers. (I still haven't been able to get our plotter working, but at least our CAD software doesn't crash 5 times a day anymore).
CD-RWs are more expensive, and often have playback problems in stereo equipment.
Well, yeah. Of course they are. That's why I don't own one and have disuaded everyone I know who has considered purchasing one.
I did realize that the poster was refering to stereo component CD burners, but only after I had submited my own post. However, I stand by my assertion that they are being ripped off, and simply change my reasons for saying it.
Second, the idea that you have to buy special "Music" CD-Rs is total BS. Consumer electronics have problems with open CD-RWs (my burner is write only, so I'm not familiar with the -RW particulars) and multisession CD-Rs. I've been copying, mixing, etc to regular old cheap CD-Rs for years now and I've never had a problem playing them. I don't use multi-session and I always close the disc. Of course, I do all this on a PC, so I don't know how things work with those consumer CD copiers.
Third, I was going to post about the "pc-friendliness" of DVDs as well. Gladiator came with software on it that it urgently told me I absolutely had to install or I wouldn't be able to watch the movie. Against my better judgement I installed it. It was the crappiest DVD playing software I have ever tried. Playback was choppy and full of artifacts, which on my system (Athlon 750,384M RAM, GeForce2 GTS, SB Live! Platinum) is totally unacceptable. In fact, I got better playback on my old K6-2 with a TNT1.
Sorry if this sounds sort of flame-ish. I'm out of coffee...
Or I could buy a 200 CD jukebox for even less
So, why is this cool?
Of course, it doesn't seem like that will ever happen...
(Yes, I know that in Amazon's case it's Linux v Sun, but Linux v Win2k was mentioned in this somewhat meandering article)
The part I liked best was when I went to update MS Office to SR2, and it told me I had to install all the SR1 patches first, and when I went to do that it told me I had to have an SR1 CD. "But I upgraded to SR1 online!", I said, "Isn't my SR0 CD enough for you?". When I gave up and ejected the CD I noticed it said SR1 on it...
Likely the source of my confusion
It's been a while, so my memories are somewhat muddled...
The monitors we were using were equal to or better than that, but they still won't handle 1080i. Because of the letterbox aspect ratio, the operating resolution is 1920x1080. There are monitors that will handle that, but they're not within my price range yet...
There are something like 18 different standards that fall with the broad heading of HDTV, so I have to warn you that your description is a little simplified. I wish it were that simple, but the FCC has decided to let the market work it out, so it's about as standardized as DVD burners.
I used to test/troubleshoot profesional video equipment. Until I actually saw it I couldn't care less about HDTV. The problem is that true HDTV runs at 1920x1080 (as I recall). Why is that a problem? Because most monitors won't do that.
Most of our test bays used standard computer monitors for output, we ran the signal the signal through a box that stepped down the resolution. I still looked sweet, but it was nothing compared to watching the same signal on a real HDTV monitor.
Granted, most HDTV broadcasts will be at one of the lower resolution standards, so it probably won't matter that much...
You mean ustoyou.com, us2you.com seems to be a domain registry service (they do have a cool mouse-over-controlled spinning cube, though it doesn't seem to have any real purpose other than being cool), and has some link to some interesting (at first glance) space/scifi sites.
ustoyou.com is just porn pop-ups (including one really annoying one I had to Ctrl-Alt-Del to get rid of), there doesn't seem to be any actual content.
I have one problem with this statement, and that is the use of the word "need". It treats Linux like a business, which it isn't. SuSE and Red Hat are businesses, and if you're looking for somewhere to suggest features, those are likely excellent places to start. I suppose that would be the third option to the two I mentioned before. It would certainly be nice to have a better way to address the needs of the average user. I would love to see a site where I could donate money for a feature, and other people who wanted that same feature could donate also, until the project is worth enough for someone to take it on. I recall an article on /. a while back that brought up this idea, and I have seen developer sites with messages posted to the effect of "I will pay someone $3000 if they can add [feature] to [project]" (unfortunately I can't remember where I saw that and I haven't run across anything like it recently).
I would even be interested in starting a site to do this from, but I don't have the resources to do it myself. Initial investment would include a server(s) that can at least pretend to handle the initial slashdoting when the service is opened, and some cash to open an account with a descent interest rate. My plan is this: the donations are made by [check, credit card, paypal, whatever] and held in this interest bearing account. When a project is completed, the triumphant coder get's a check equal to the donations and the site keeps the interest to cover overhead. Will it work? I don't know. It depends on how popular the service becomes. Worst case would be that people don't choose to use it, next worst is the site has to take a small percentage of the reward to help cover costs.
I worked for a company a while back that was a facilitator for 1031 delayed exchanges for aircraft, exchange meaning trade for like item, like trading one plane for another (you could also do this with houses and other big ticket items). The delayed exchange allowed you to sell the plane and keep that money tax free for the purchase of another plane within a year (as I recall, I was just doing data entry). The money had to be held in escrow by a third party (the facilitator) in order for it to be tax free, but the facilitator requirement was removed a few years ago. This particular company's fee was one quarter of one percent (.25%) of the amount held.
We wouldn't need office space, as the servers could be in my house (my lines are capable of 6M DSL, but my wallet isn't :( , another reason I can't go it alone on this). If anyone's seriously interested in something like this, drop me a line. I read all responses to my /. posts, the email above is valid (save /.'s anti-spam mangling) and the link on my user page will give you my daytime phone number (ask for Pete). If you'd rather steal my idea and do it yourself, go for it. All I ask is that you send a thank you my way, it doesn't even have to be publicly acknowledged.
I would love to see Linux dominate the desktop as well, and that's where my fledgling hacking skills are aimed. The "code it yourself" response is a direct result of so many coming to open source expecting to get something for nothing. That isn't what it's about, a contribution is still required for everything to work smoothly, but that contribution doesn't have to be monetary. I haven't seen the statement that "linux is only free if your time is worthless" lately, but it's still equally valid.
I know there are countless users of open source software that don't write code, I'm one of them. I realized that I had 2 choices when it came to getting Linux to do exactly what I want, either find someone who can code and get them to do the work, or learn to code and do it myself. I chose to learn to code, so I bought some books and I'm struggling through it. Sure it's tiresome to hear "write it yourself", but it's more tiresome to hear people bitching about something that's being given to them for free! I'm tired of listening to all these pathetic whiners saying "why'd they do it that way or not do it this way and why doesn't it have this feature..." The vast majority of the code is produced by people working on their own time and for their own reasons, and they provide their code to the rest of the world for free just because they are cool guys. They certainly don't do it to support a bunch of 1337 h4x0rs whos only contribution to the community is spewing flames at Windows users!
I'm not suggesting that you or the other guy are that bad, but Christ, show some fucking gratitude when somebody gives you something!
I beleive it was win98 (not SE) he was trimming. Another poster in this thread claims 30MB with win95.
Mozilla is not just a browser. The purpose of Mozilla is to provide a higher quality software base for the Netscape Communications Suite, that's why the Mozilla source was opened in the first place. A communications suite certainly has need of a calendar app, and therefore this third party add-on does add value to the Mozilla package.
It wasn't given to KDE or Gnome directly because it wasn't designed for KDE or Gnome. And why would it be? OEone is a company, and companies want their product to be available to the maximum number of people possible. Mozilla targets almost 100% of desktops, more than any other software I know of. KDE is used on maybe 1% of desktops. I don't think it's any mystery why a company would design their software to work with Mozilla rather than KDE.
It was extremely gracious and generous of OEone to release the source to their code. It is a gift to the community! We should say thank you, and if it isn't useful to you, either do the work to make it useful or shut the hell up.
If this is the kind of attitude companies are met with when they decide to open their source code, is it any wonder so many companies don't?