RISCOS started it's life considerably earlier than 1994. The first official release was 1988 I believe. Back then it was ahead of it's time. Those first versions had anti-aliased fonts and many other user-friendly features that are still missing from other modern GUIs today.
If you look at the screenshots the interface may look a bit primitive by todays standards (Acorn never bothered to hire proper designers to make things look pretty;), but it is still hanging around today because it is such a nice a GUI to use - for beginner and advanced users alike.
I downloaded it and tried it out a couple of weeks ago after the last review posted on slashdot.
I quite liked it. I think it would be a good distro for newbies.
However I have since removed it for one main reason - I wanted to install some software that required glibc2 and discovered that Lycoris is only glibc1.
A fairly important fact that neither of these two reviews mentioned.
Conclusions: the speed of the XFS because in the first test has surprised me that I made (a single experiment) not parecia so fast. For writing, reading and erasure of great files (sequentially) it seems that he is the one that runs more. Although the ReiserFS does not do anything badly, hoped that it won to him to the XFS. In this test another thing has called me the attention: all except FAT32 take more in reading than in writing. Somebody can explain that? Something related to / dev/null and / dev/zero? As far as the tests with the source code of kernel... the copy of tar has given somewhat rare results: at first sight fastest it has been XFS, soon Ext2FS, soon ReiserFS, and finally (that surprise ]: -) FAT32. But that is watching the averages. There is another peculiar thing (that I have not put in the table): in this test the variance using ReiserFS has been very great, oscillating between 16,94 and 63,48 seconds. I cannot explain that. I repeated this test six times instead of three, and one did not become stabilized. Executing it of three in three times (tapeworm script prepared to do that, and I executed it twice) the first copy took about 20 seconds, second about 60 and third about 30. That happened to me twice. Poltergeist? The extraction of tar (that implies reading of a put in great file with the creation of a great tree with many files) has been sudden for FAT32, whereas XFS has behaved more than bién, and ReiserFS and regular Ext2FS (almost they take the same). If in the previous test it called the attention the enormous variance in the time of copy of great files with ReiserFS, here the consistency of the XFS results has called the attention (identical in the three experiments). It is not that it is promoting the XFS, but is that the tests have left me therefore Or: -) As far as the erasure... Creia that fastest was ReiserFS but the XFS has won him erasing a great file. However, the XFS is the slowest with muchisima difference at the time of erasing a complex structure of directories with many files, and the FAT32 () is fastest. Somebody can explain it? Any commentary will be welcome; -)
I don't agree. In the film Rachel is introduced by Tyrell as a new model replicant - ie just created. I don't think you could assume she was one of five (of the six who escaped) that made it to earth.
Whilst I had always noted the 'miscount' in the film, and I was aware of the speculation that Deckard was a replicant, I hadn't taken that last step of connected these two facts to come up with the idea that Deckard was the other escaped replicant that had made it to Earth (as the BBC article suggests). It seems a rather obvious leap now, although the film does give the impression that Deckard had been a replicant hunter for some time - and not a recently arrived escapee.
throw him into a pool of water the same size as the room, and yell at him, it will take longer for sound to reach him because it is in a different medium
Sound travels faster in water.
Also, sound waves are a different sort of beast than radio waves. Don't you remember your high school physics?
AFAIK refrigeration was invented in the 1850s. Refrigerated cargo ships were plying the oceans, long before 1900 ticked over.
The internal combustion engine was invented in the 1890s.
As others have said, the Romans had highways and water-distribution.
I think they would have been better to focus more on uniquely 20th Century engineering feats like computers, space travel etc.
Even better still, specific tech/sci/engineering feats, like Rutherford splitting the atom, the Manhattan Project, The Empire State Building, the transistor, DNA, flight (the Wrights were arguably not the first) etc etc
IMO somewhat of a lack-lustre site that seems to present a very US-centric view of technological developments.
This post is blatant flamebait - but rattling merkin chains always works and is usually amusing to do;)
Some points worth talking about have been raised in this thread though...
The.us domain policy does need to be changed to reflect the fact that the internet is becoming less and less dominated by the US. The fact that companies using.us have to use unrememberable org.locality.state.us domains completely discourages companies from using the.us domain. At the present time, US companies basically don't have any choice but to get a.com domain - even if they sell exclusively to residents of, say, Pigsqueal, Arkansas. I know other countries have made this point in the ICANN discussions.
Secondly, the 'internet' was certainly not the only network around - there were others, like janet & starnet. It won because:
It had a head start
It was based in a country with a huge population
Same reason why only the US desktop computer companies (PC & Mac) won - there used to be dozens - from many different countries.
Thirdly, someone said that the rest of the world should be paying the US back for inventing and building the net. I will ignore for the moment the fact that the technologies that drive the net today were not all invented in the States, in order to point out that we are paying you back:
The US backbone companies charge other countries to (a) connect to them (b) get traffic from them (c) send traffic to them. They don't recipricate though (AFAIK).
The rest of the world now provides lot of technology and information back to the US. Eg think Linux, ICQ, etc etc
Stupid question perhaps.. (I'm no expert on chess terminology), but does the term 'mate' necessarily refer to checkmate? Could the game end, instead, with a stalemate?
To be fair (much as I dislike having to say it), the MS player system is probably the most open of the three main choices (MS, Real & Quicktime).
Real: The codecs and to some extent, the streaming format are very closed. There is source out there for the version 2.0 and 3.0 audio codecs, but the later ones and the video codec seem to be very propietary. Also they don't appear to be able to write very good players - eg the well-known 'video crapping out halfway through streams' problem etc. The only players out there are ones Real wrote themselves.
Quicktime: More documented. The stream and file structure is well documented, but the codecs aren't. For instance, most of (or a lot of) the HQ streams around seem to use the Sorensen codec, which I believe Apple bought and are keeping very close to their chests.
MS: Seems to me to be the most friendly option to the free software community.. their streaming format doesn't appear to be too hard to reverse engineer (assuming it's not documented anywhere - I haven't checked that out), I remember having a snoop at it when ASF/Media Player was first released. As for codecs - most of the streams appear to use MPEG4 or H323 type compression. Ie. standard codecs with available source.
If the Aussies decided they were upset enough about this to take some sort of protest action, one way would be for ISPs to redirect any HTTP requests from.gov.au and.mil.au domains to some sort of 'access denied as a protest' page.
Slashdot Mirror
Also recommended as an intelligent contribution to the sci-fi genre: The Quiet Earth
RISCOS started it's life considerably earlier than 1994. The first official release was 1988 I believe. Back then it was ahead of it's time. Those first versions had anti-aliased fonts and many other user-friendly features that are still missing from other modern GUIs today.
;), but it is still hanging around today because it is such a nice a GUI to use - for beginner and advanced users alike.
If you look at the screenshots the interface may look a bit primitive by todays standards (Acorn never bothered to hire proper designers to make things look pretty
Xtra is NZ's biggest ISP and is run by NZ Telecom which has a monopoly on DSL. It's DSL pricing is here ($NZ):
60MB at their excess charge (18c/MB after 500MB) is NZ$11
I wouldn't be too pleased with yourself. I read a dozen or so of the reviews and noticed quite a number of spelling mistakes.
I downloaded it and tried it out a couple of weeks ago after the last review posted on slashdot.
I quite liked it. I think it would be a good distro for newbies.
However I have since removed it for one main reason -
I wanted to install some software that required glibc2 and discovered that Lycoris is only glibc1.
A fairly important fact that neither of these two reviews mentioned.
You really ought to consider reading the article before you post.
> The manual doesn't say whether the phone
> initially defaults to "Tracking On" or "Off".
But the press release does. It says the service is 'opt in'. I took that to mean GPS is off by default.
Conclusions: the speed of the XFS because in the first test has surprised me that I made (a single experiment) not parecia so fast. For writing, reading and erasure of great files (sequentially) it seems that he is the one that runs more. Although the ReiserFS does not do anything badly, hoped that it won to him to the XFS. In this test another thing has called me the attention: all except FAT32 take more in reading than in writing. Somebody can explain that? Something related to / dev/null and / dev/zero? As far as the tests with the source code of kernel... the copy of tar has given somewhat rare results: at first sight fastest it has been XFS, soon Ext2FS, soon ReiserFS, and finally (that surprise ]: -) FAT32. But that is watching the averages. There is another peculiar thing (that I have not put in the table): in this test the variance using ReiserFS has been very great, oscillating between 16,94 and 63,48 seconds. I cannot explain that. I repeated this test six times instead of three, and one did not become stabilized. Executing it of three in three times (tapeworm script prepared to do that, and I executed it twice) the first copy took about 20 seconds, second about 60 and third about 30. That happened to me twice. Poltergeist? The extraction of tar (that implies reading of a put in great file with the creation of a great tree with many files) has been sudden for FAT32, whereas XFS has behaved more than bién, and ReiserFS and regular Ext2FS (almost they take the same). If in the previous test it called the attention the enormous variance in the time of copy of great files with ReiserFS, here the consistency of the XFS results has called the attention (identical in the three experiments). It is not that it is promoting the XFS, but is that the tests have left me therefore Or: -) As far as the erasure... Creia that fastest was ReiserFS but the XFS has won him erasing a great file. However, the XFS is the slowest with muchisima difference at the time of erasing a complex structure of directories with many files, and the FAT32 () is fastest. Somebody can explain it? Any commentary will be welcome; -)
Whilst I had always noted the 'miscount' in the film, and I was aware of the speculation that Deckard was a replicant, I hadn't taken that last step of connected these two facts to come up with the idea that Deckard was the other escaped replicant that had made it to Earth (as the BBC article suggests). It seems a rather obvious leap now, although the film does give the impression that Deckard had been a replicant hunter for some time - and not a recently arrived escapee.
mailto:jasno@street=main+st&city=bendoverandsqueal ®ion=arkansas&country=us
or are you maybe
mailto:238745690216@earth
methinks that could be a bit unworkable...
If they were to do that, then I'd like to see them to put their money where there mouth is and open all their own proprietary formats first.
Sound travels faster in water.
Also, sound waves are a different sort of beast than radio waves. Don't you remember your high school physics?
Apparently, the same volcano has created other small islands (islets?) in the past that have been subsequently reclaimed by the sea.
:)
If you put a server farm there, make sure you get insurance
AFAIK refrigeration was invented in the 1850s. Refrigerated cargo ships were plying the oceans, long before 1900 ticked over.
The internal combustion engine was invented in the 1890s.
As others have said, the Romans had highways and water-distribution.
I think they would have been better to focus more on uniquely 20th Century engineering feats like computers, space travel etc.
Even better still, specific tech/sci/engineering feats, like Rutherford splitting the atom, the Manhattan Project, The Empire State Building, the transistor, DNA, flight (the Wrights were arguably not the first) etc etc
IMO somewhat of a lack-lustre site that seems to present a very US-centric view of technological developments.
god bless the USA... they invented everything.
Some points worth talking about have been raised in this thread though...
The .us domain policy does need to be changed to reflect the fact that the internet is becoming less and less dominated by the US. The fact that companies using .us have to use unrememberable org.locality.state.us domains completely discourages companies from using the .us domain. At the present time, US companies basically don't have any choice but to get a .com domain - even if they sell exclusively to residents of, say, Pigsqueal, Arkansas. I know other countries have made this point in the ICANN discussions.
Secondly, the 'internet' was certainly not the only network around - there were others, like janet & starnet. It won because:
- It had a head start
- It was based in a country with a huge population
Same reason why only the US desktop computer companies (PC & Mac) won - there used to be dozens - from many different countries.Thirdly, someone said that the rest of the world should be paying the US back for inventing and building the net. I will ignore for the moment the fact that the technologies that drive the net today were not all invented in the States, in order to point out that we are paying you back:
IMO, the most useful thing a browser could have to help with this banner/privacy/cookie issue would be to have an option like the following:
[X} Reject cookies sent with inline objects
That would get rid of cookies sent with banner ads etc but would leave the useful cookies (eg for customisation) alone.
That'd do me.
Forget all this 'originating server' bullshit. The simple way to get around most of this banner/cookie stuff is just for browsers to have a checkbox:
[X] Reject cookies sent with inline objects
Which would mean that all cookies sent with images/sounds etc would be rejected.
That'd do me.
Stupid question perhaps.. (I'm no expert on chess terminology), but does the term 'mate' necessarily refer to checkmate? Could the game end, instead, with a stalemate?
Lets give the MTV generation a real test.
Lock them in the bunker Dec 31 with a time-release
door lock set to open in 7 days.
We can watch them, but they have no outside communications.
At midnight on Jan 1, play sound fx through the
walls at them... you know, big explosion, people
screaming etc etc. After 3 days: silence.
Meanwhile we all just sit back and watch the fun
on the webcams.
To be fair (much as I dislike having to say it), the MS player system is probably the most open of
the three main choices (MS, Real & Quicktime).
Real: The codecs and to some extent, the streaming format are very closed. There is source out there for the version 2.0 and 3.0 audio codecs, but the later ones and the video codec seem to be very propietary. Also they don't appear to be able to write very good players - eg the well-known 'video crapping out halfway through streams' problem etc.
The only players out there are ones Real wrote themselves.
Quicktime: More documented. The stream and file structure is well documented, but the codecs aren't. For instance, most of (or a lot of) the HQ streams around seem to use the Sorensen codec, which I believe Apple bought and are keeping very close to their chests.
MS: Seems to me to be the most friendly option to the free software community.. their streaming format doesn't appear to be too hard to reverse engineer (assuming it's not documented anywhere - I haven't checked that out), I remember having a snoop at it when ASF/Media Player was first released. As for codecs - most of the streams appear to use MPEG4 or H323 type compression.
Ie. standard codecs with available source.
If the Aussies decided they were upset enough about this to take some sort of protest action, one way would be for ISPs to redirect any HTTP requests from .gov.au and .mil.au domains to some sort of 'access denied as a protest' page.
Just a thought...