Yes, after all, we celebrate it every year, the date does not change and it is short (only 6 numbers, including the year, which I can remember by knowing that she's 30 years older than me).
Your anniversary?
N/A, but people usually remember things like that not only because they remember the date, but they remember some other things about the day.
Who won the last 5 World Series?
No idea. I could look it up though.
The name of the first girl you had a crush on?
Yes.
What I'd mean if I were to say "Ni!" to an old woman?
No idea.
People can remember all sorts of information, if it is important enough to them.
However, the other information has some associations and is not arbitrary like a password. I can remember a lot of things by remembering what I was thinking or doing at the time when I saw the information, how the information applies to something else and so on. That's why I am terrible with names (for example I can remember some mathematical theorem but not remember after whom it was named), faces and languages (I understand only one foreign language - English).
a password is something arbitrary, that's why a lot of people use the names of their pets or children as a password, you can remember them more easily. A password like "$#%ge33y4D@" is very hard to remember, because I would have to remember each character separately and somehow remember their order. If I didn't need to change it every so often, I could remember it after entering it from a piece of paper every day for a long time. Then I could burn that piece of paper, but a few days after that I have to change my password and guess what, I have to write it to a piece of paper (or my cell phone).
And there never will be a single answer for everyone.
Some may want the new version just because it has better graphics. Some may want it because it is newer. Some may not care at all and use whatever they got (XP on their desktop, vista on a newer laptop, 7 on a even newer laptop).
And I am not looking for a reason not to use 7, or Vista. I am looking for a reason to justify formatting the drive and installing a newer OS, probably with some incompatibilities. For now, at least, I have not found one. Reinstall is very painful (that's why I have a backup of my system drive) and I would need a very good reason for it (usually the reason was "the current system is so broken that it gives a BSOD very often", but now I can just restore the backup).
And installing a program for backup, or recording.iso files or whatever, is generally less work than installing a whole new OS, so, as long as I can do whatever I want with my current OS (XP), I will not upgrade to a newer one.
Also, sometimes the alternatives may be better, for example, Truecrypt may be better than the built-in encryption tool.
Now, if you want a reason not to use 7 and you are willing to do a reinstall of your OS, then I cannot give you one, maybe 7 is slower than XP (I find it hard to believe that 7 is faster, although I may try to install it on a PC with a 1GHz CPU and 512MB RAM - after all, XP works OK there, so if 7 is faster...)
The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again, rather than just "Pictures" or "Documents".
So it's back to the NT4/2000/XP version?
You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer.
Nice, or I can use CDRWIN.
It's easier to enable BitKeeper. BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.
Truecrypt
It's easier to enable BitKeeper. BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.
Seriuosly, why? 200MB is a wring size if you want to record to a CD (3*200MB and 50-100MB of wasted space) or DVD (22 files and 49MB of wasted spae) which would be the most common media people back up to. Is/was there any recordable media with a 200MB capacity?
Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?
Windows XP supports 5.25" floppies, but if you want to format them you need to use the command line because if you rightclick on the floppy and choose "Format" you get no choices (for capacity etc) in the "format floppy" window.
I have two 1.2 MB drives and one 360K. Both high capacity drives were in use, so when I wanted to make a router of an old PC (with floppyfw) but needed another floppy drive because I wanted a few more programs on it I used the 360K drive, then wrote a 360K floppy in one of the 1.2MB drives. If was readable by the 360K drive.
And when somebody tried to explain what an object is like that I didn't get it. After some time I got it: an object is the same as a "record" in Pascal/Delphi, the only difference is that it has functions and procedures in addition to variables.
My father bought a Fujitsu U810 laptop. It has a ~6inch screen and a resolution of 1024x600. It would be OK for me, but my dad is not nearsighted and cannot see such small letters, so I increased the DPI, increased font size everywhere I could, but it still left some parts where the text is of its original size (=barely readable).
The fact that LCDs are less deep than CRTs means only that you can put more than one monitor (one behind the other) in a place that was occupied by a CRT monitor. It does not mean that you can put more than one monitor side by side, since they are about the same width.
It depends on the desk. I put my 21" CRT monitor in a corner, so it really takes not a lot of space on the desk. However, since the monitor is in the corner, there is not much space to the sides of it. Someone suggested to me that I buy two LCD monitors and put them on my desk - I could do that, but only one monitor behind the other.
In any case, I'm happy with my CRT monitor and won't change it (I'll but another CRT someday (yes, it will have to be a used one) just to have a second spare - I have one now, but it's only 17").
What I like about my monitor is that it can display 1920x1440@85Hz (for HD movies, though I can set it to 1920x1200 and adjust the height) and 1600x1200 (for usual stuff, since text at 1920x1440 is hard to read) without any problems or artifacts.
No, I live in Lithuania, the country with one of the fastest upload speeds.
However, I live in a private house and nobody wants to lay 100 meters of fiber cable to my house, therefore I am stuck with ADSL with its 768kbps upload. For now at least.
I know of an even better solution for "oh shit, I deleted a file" moments: Have the backup software copy all files to the other harddrive. Then once every X hours, have it copy changed files. If a file was deleted on the main hard drive, move it to a separate directory on the backup drive. When that drive is full and you need space for new files, delete the oldest "deleted" files until you have enough free space.
FAT filesystem has a second copy of FAT right after the first one. They are updated at the same time, but usually only the first one is used for reading. If the drive develops a bad sector there, you can copy the FAT from its backup.
NTFS has a copy of the first 16 MFT records only. If a bad sector develops inside the original MFT, you can lose up to 64 files. This has happened to me. I am only using NTFS only because I have files bigger than 4GB.
Anyone knows a way to make a backup of the MFT to another disk at the time of write? Then it would be almost the same as with FAT.
My advice is something most people don't want to hear: for personal use, get backups online for $5/month. Mozy/Carbonite/etc. There are zillion vendors, just Google it. In two years, it will cost you about as much as that 2nd hard drive. It protects you far better than that 2nd hard drive, and it's so automatic that you'll hardly notice it until the moment it actually matters: when you just have discovered that your data is gone.
And is so slow that a LS120 drive reading a 1.44MB floppy would actually be faster. Or a 1x CROM. Or a 16 year old hard drive.
Also, I have to trust that the service and my internet connection will be available when I need to restore my data.
OK, distribution. So if I go to a retail store, steal 200 physical CDs, distribute them to my friends and get cought. Would I have to pay $2M?
How may CDs could I steal to have to pay $2M fine for it?
Remember, a CD is a physical object, the theft of which actually causes a very measurable loss (price of that CD). Uploading a copy of a song does not cause the same loss.
It's so we can run Windows 3.11 on top of Windows 2000 on top of Windows XP on top of Windows Vista on top of Windows 7 which is inside a browser running on Java inside Windows 2000 which is on top of Windows XP, which is on top of Vista, which is on top of 7.
And it may even have enough speed to run as fast as a 386 25MHz...
When I installed Linux for someone, I remember downloading a bunch of.dll files with codecs (could be another extension, this was some years ago). So it is possible to have an external codec with a way for the multimedia player to use it (I believe it was mplayer). Couldn't this be done with browser codecs (either download the files, copy them from mplayer directory or just lint to the mplayer directory)?
With Windows, I find that CCCP (which is ffdshow + some players) + RealAlternative supports almost any file I encounter. I prefer to use CoreAVC for h264 decoding though but ffdshow can decode it too.
Hi, this site uses h.264 codec which you do not have, please install it or download CCCP (http://cccp-project.net ) and have all the codecs you need.
Or it can be done that the browser sends to the server what codecs the system supports and the server sends a supported file, if no such file exists the server shows the message above.
Also, this will be flexible enough so that future codecs can be used, you just need to download them. Otherwise we might have HTML6 standard where the only difference from HTML5 is that the current codec (h264 or ogg) is replaced by SuperEfficientCodec2014.
I also like ffdshow because it gives me an ability to adjust the properties of the video - I mainly use the gamma adjustment on some very dark videos. With current Flash video, I have to download the file, open it in a DirectShow compatible player and then I can get to the adjustments provided by FFDShow.
I thought the point of video tag was to remove Flash from video playing duty, so that sites did not have to pay Adobe money. If HTML5 used system codecs, sites could choose - use the fully free but maybe lower quality ogg, use the not-so-free but higher quality and more compatible h264 or some other codec.
With this, we'll see what the standard codec will be. Mozilla does not want h.264 and loves ogg, some other browser vendor loves h.264 and hates ogg and so on... Whichever codec will be chosen, some vendors will be unhappy.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you remember your mother's birthday?
Yes, after all, we celebrate it every year, the date does not change and it is short (only 6 numbers, including the year, which I can remember by knowing that she's 30 years older than me).
Your anniversary?
N/A, but people usually remember things like that not only because they remember the date, but they remember some other things about the day.
Who won the last 5 World Series?
No idea. I could look it up though.
The name of the first girl you had a crush on?
Yes.
What I'd mean if I were to say "Ni!" to an old woman?
No idea.
People can remember all sorts of information, if it is important enough to them.
However, the other information has some associations and is not arbitrary like a password. I can remember a lot of things by remembering what I was thinking or doing at the time when I saw the information, how the information applies to something else and so on. That's why I am terrible with names (for example I can remember some mathematical theorem but not remember after whom it was named), faces and languages (I understand only one foreign language - English).
a password is something arbitrary, that's why a lot of people use the names of their pets or children as a password, you can remember them more easily. A password like "$#%ge33y4D@" is very hard to remember, because I would have to remember each character separately and somehow remember their order. If I didn't need to change it every so often, I could remember it after entering it from a piece of paper every day for a long time. Then I could burn that piece of paper, but a few days after that I have to change my password and guess what, I have to write it to a piece of paper (or my cell phone).
And there never will be a single answer for everyone.
Some may want the new version just because it has better graphics.
Some may want it because it is newer.
Some may not care at all and use whatever they got (XP on their desktop, vista on a newer laptop, 7 on a even newer laptop).
And I am not looking for a reason not to use 7, or Vista. I am looking for a reason to justify formatting the drive and installing a newer OS, probably with some incompatibilities. For now, at least, I have not found one. Reinstall is very painful (that's why I have a backup of my system drive) and I would need a very good reason for it (usually the reason was "the current system is so broken that it gives a BSOD very often", but now I can just restore the backup).
And installing a program for backup, or recording .iso files or whatever, is generally less work than installing a whole new OS, so, as long as I can do whatever I want with my current OS (XP), I will not upgrade to a newer one.
Also, sometimes the alternatives may be better, for example, Truecrypt may be better than the built-in encryption tool.
Now, if you want a reason not to use 7 and you are willing to do a reinstall of your OS, then I cannot give you one, maybe 7 is slower than XP (I find it hard to believe that 7 is faster, although I may try to install it on a PC with a 1GHz CPU and 512MB RAM - after all, XP works OK there, so if 7 is faster...)
By extracting the files from the .iso and opening the whole directory with ZoomPlayer. It makes the DVD FAT32-compatible too.
The backup utility actually lets you select what files to backup again, rather than just "Pictures" or "Documents".
So it's back to the NT4/2000/XP version?
You can burn ISO files straight from Explorer.
Nice, or I can use CDRWIN.
It's easier to enable BitKeeper. BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.
Truecrypt
It's easier to enable BitKeeper. BitKeeper is pretty crap - it needs about 1.5GB unencrypted space to hold the 'system' files - but the installer now creates this space by default, so it's easier to actually turn encryption on.
Seriuosly, why? 200MB is a wring size if you want to record to a CD (3*200MB and 50-100MB of wasted space) or DVD (22 files and 49MB of wasted spae) which would be the most common media people back up to. Is/was there any recordable media with a 200MB capacity?
Do I really need to pay $XX, or install some spyware-infested freeware crap, just to mount ISOs?
You can use Virtual CloneDrive from the makers of AnyDVD HD http://www.slysoft.com/en/virtual-clonedrive.html
ads? what ads?
Windows XP supports 5.25" floppies, but if you want to format them you need to use the command line because if you rightclick on the floppy and choose "Format" you get no choices (for capacity etc) in the "format floppy" window.
I have two 1.2 MB drives and one 360K. Both high capacity drives were in use, so when I wanted to make a router of an old PC (with floppyfw) but needed another floppy drive because I wanted a few more programs on it I used the 360K drive, then wrote a 360K floppy in one of the 1.2MB drives. If was readable by the 360K drive.
And when somebody tried to explain what an object is like that I didn't get it. After some time I got it: an object is the same as a "record" in Pascal/Delphi, the only difference is that it has functions and procedures in addition to variables.
Why USB? AFAIK modern motherboards still have floppy disk interface and support both 3.5" and 5.25" drives.
That may be difficult.
My father bought a Fujitsu U810 laptop. It has a ~6inch screen and a resolution of 1024x600. It would be OK for me, but my dad is not nearsighted and cannot see such small letters, so I increased the DPI, increased font size everywhere I could, but it still left some parts where the text is of its original size (=barely readable).
The fact that LCDs are less deep than CRTs means only that you can put more than one monitor (one behind the other) in a place that was occupied by a CRT monitor. It does not mean that you can put more than one monitor side by side, since they are about the same width.
It depends on the desk. I put my 21" CRT monitor in a corner, so it really takes not a lot of space on the desk. However, since the monitor is in the corner, there is not much space to the sides of it. Someone suggested to me that I buy two LCD monitors and put them on my desk - I could do that, but only one monitor behind the other.
In any case, I'm happy with my CRT monitor and won't change it (I'll but another CRT someday (yes, it will have to be a used one) just to have a second spare - I have one now, but it's only 17").
What I like about my monitor is that it can display 1920x1440@85Hz (for HD movies, though I can set it to 1920x1200 and adjust the height) and 1600x1200 (for usual stuff, since text at 1920x1440 is hard to read) without any problems or artifacts.
Now I'll know that before updating Firefox I have to carefully read the "what's new in version x.y" part.
No, I live in Lithuania, the country with one of the fastest upload speeds.
However, I live in a private house and nobody wants to lay 100 meters of fiber cable to my house, therefore I am stuck with ADSL with its 768kbps upload. For now at least.
RAID1 will protect you from a failed drive (so it's slightly better than having a single drive), while RAID0 is even worse than having a single drive.
I know of an even better solution for "oh shit, I deleted a file" moments:
Have the backup software copy all files to the other harddrive. Then once every X hours, have it copy changed files. If a file was deleted on the main hard drive, move it to a separate directory on the backup drive. When that drive is full and you need space for new files, delete the oldest "deleted" files until you have enough free space.
FAT filesystem has a second copy of FAT right after the first one. They are updated at the same time, but usually only the first one is used for reading. If the drive develops a bad sector there, you can copy the FAT from its backup.
NTFS has a copy of the first 16 MFT records only. If a bad sector develops inside the original MFT, you can lose up to 64 files. This has happened to me. I am only using NTFS only because I have files bigger than 4GB.
Anyone knows a way to make a backup of the MFT to another disk at the time of write? Then it would be almost the same as with FAT.
My advice is something most people don't want to hear: for personal use, get backups online for $5/month. Mozy/Carbonite/etc. There are zillion vendors, just Google it. In two years, it will cost you about as much as that 2nd hard drive. It protects you far better than that 2nd hard drive, and it's so automatic that you'll hardly notice it until the moment it actually matters: when you just have discovered that your data is gone.
And is so slow that a LS120 drive reading a 1.44MB floppy would actually be faster. Or a 1x CROM. Or a 16 year old hard drive.
Also, I have to trust that the service and my internet connection will be available when I need to restore my data.
Or I can use RAID... and tapes.
OK, distribution. So if I go to a retail store, steal 200 physical CDs, distribute them to my friends and get cought. Would I have to pay $2M?
How may CDs could I steal to have to pay $2M fine for it?
Remember, a CD is a physical object, the theft of which actually causes a very measurable loss (price of that CD). Uploading a copy of a song does not cause the same loss.
It's so we can run Windows 3.11 on top of Windows 2000 on top of Windows XP on top of Windows Vista on top of Windows 7 which is inside a browser running on Java inside Windows 2000 which is on top of Windows XP, which is on top of Vista, which is on top of 7.
And it may even have enough speed to run as fast as a 386 25MHz...
When I installed Linux for someone, I remember downloading a bunch of .dll files with codecs (could be another extension, this was some years ago). So it is possible to have an external codec with a way for the multimedia player to use it (I believe it was mplayer). Couldn't this be done with browser codecs (either download the files, copy them from mplayer directory or just lint to the mplayer directory)?
With Windows, I find that CCCP (which is ffdshow + some players) + RealAlternative supports almost any file I encounter. I prefer to use CoreAVC for h264 decoding though but ffdshow can decode it too.
Hi, this site uses h.264 codec which you do not have, please install it or download CCCP (http://cccp-project.net ) and have all the codecs you need.
Or it can be done that the browser sends to the server what codecs the system supports and the server sends a supported file, if no such file exists the server shows the message above.
Also, this will be flexible enough so that future codecs can be used, you just need to download them. Otherwise we might have HTML6 standard where the only difference from HTML5 is that the current codec (h264 or ogg) is replaced by SuperEfficientCodec2014.
I also like ffdshow because it gives me an ability to adjust the properties of the video - I mainly use the gamma adjustment on some very dark videos. With current Flash video, I have to download the file, open it in a DirectShow compatible player and then I can get to the adjustments provided by FFDShow.
Or they could tell the users to download and install ffdshow/CCCP, or ship it with the browser.
I thought the point of video tag was to remove Flash from video playing duty, so that sites did not have to pay Adobe money. If HTML5 used system codecs, sites could choose - use the fully free but maybe lower quality ogg, use the not-so-free but higher quality and more compatible h264 or some other codec.
With this, we'll see what the standard codec will be. Mozilla does not want h.264 and loves ogg, some other browser vendor loves h.264 and hates ogg and so on... Whichever codec will be chosen, some vendors will be unhappy.