That's why we put their brains in little jars and throw away the bodies. Much more compact. Create a nice VR world and give all the brains WiFi access and you're set.
You know you don't have to just play Minesweeper. You could plug into the network or at least install some new programs from disc. Many of us think of Windows as the virus so I have doubts about your claims anyway.;)
I'd be more impressed if they could index every dirty picture on MySpace and copy them all out so you could look at them in some linear way without having to work through all that annoying crap about peoples lifes. Gee at least that'd be useful.
I guess I see this is a path for an Apple/Disney merger. I'm not quite sure what that'd mean but it'd seem to be a better fit than the AOL/Time Warner merge. Apple and Pixar represent technology as art which is what Disney really needs to reclaim it's soul. Apple could leverage the Disney name and content to really make a strong move in the digital media market. I think Disney still owns ABC too which would just be more content at their fingertips. It seems it could be a powerful money making combination.
You don't get a much better child friendly combination than Apple and Disney. It'd present a lot of opportunity in the edutainment market in the least.
Instead of a counter-weight you counter gravity with magnetics. The at rest position of the magnets should equal the weight of the car. Not to hard and less moving parts and less space needed.
True although I think it isn't very noticable if the transition is gradual rather than jerking. I'd think a maglev would offer much smoother transitions than a normal elevator as it's much easier to make smooth changes to electrical charges than to mechanical devices.
IE's poor CSS and lack of proper PNG support annoys me as to death. Impossible to do many things in IE and many others are much more labor to do in IE.
I'd imagine the counterweight is replaced by magnets that give the car roughly an upward lift that matches the cars weight and possibly it's suggested load weight too. If I were going to design a maglev elevator I'd give it a tendacy to rise up when the power stops so that the car would tend towards rising and gravity would repulse that force. Rather than using the soft magnetic pull of the electro magnets to raise the car I'd use them to help it move down by counteracting the pull of the more fixed electro magnets. So if the power went out the car wouldn't tend to fall but rather it'd hover in place or slowly sink to the basement. I'd imagine they still have some sort of emergency braking system too.
The only thing on your list that really seems to be correct is slower and I'd imagine that is only in these early models. A maglev has the potential to move people much faster and be much simpler in design so probably easier to maintain, safer, and cheaper. It shouldn't use as much electricity as a normal elevator since friction should be reduced. It's all magnetics which means there is little in the way of parts to break and no need for counter-weights, pullies, etc. If the power dies I'd expect the car would just freeze in place or possibly slowly lower to the bottom floor.
The 1.5 versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are self-updating. It seems to work pretty well so far. We'll see if there are issues the auto updates can't handle. Probably some bugs since it's a new feature but it's a really good idea I think. The apps and any installed extensions will be updated as needed unless you turn updates off.
I still think IE should just repackage Firefox as IE7. Easier, totally legal, and they can give users their expected look and feel with improved security, features, and standards support of FF. Seems a good idea to me at least.
For the most part Firefox installs it's own updates unless you're using some ancient version or somehow disable updating.;)
You're IE fixes may be automated through your SUS server but you still have to wait for M$ to release the fixes which isn't usually as soon as you need the fixes.
I do wonder when Apple might consider releasing Safari for Windows, Linux, etc. Shouldn't be to hard as it's based on KHTML. It'd seem to be an area they could do well on and show off their tech.
One that really pisses me off is that on the government website I use to pay back my student loans it's impossible to logon with anything besides IE and they never say so. Their support line had no idea and the error message just says invalid password. It was only through trial and error that I figured it out at all. Lame. The government shouldn't be making websites that aren't standards complaint and accessible to all.
I haven't recently tried Konqueror but I do test in Safari (both use the KHTML engine I believe?) and usually there aren't many major bugs in Safari if it works in Firefox. Opera I've mostly given up supporting unless I just have spare time. I figure it's Opera's fault if they're not standard compliant and their market share doesn't justify much effort on my part. If you have a complaint I'd suggest yelling at Opera unless you can prove that the problem is because Firefox is breaking the standard.
If a site is standards compliant then it shouldn't have to worry about every browser out there. If the browsers can't render correctly then it is the maker of the browser who is in the wrong. Supporting IE is just a sad must because of it's ~75% market share - nobody else deserves special consideration.
You must not be a developer. IE is incredibly limiting in what you can do with your site designs and is annoyingly poorly standardized. Not only does it not follow a real standard it doesn't set it's own standard either as major changes happen between different versions of IE and are never fully documented. The IE standard is mostly whatever people can figure out by fighting to make things work in IE. So long as you're using plain HTML and don't mind rather ugly pages it's not a big deal but if you want nice looking pages and advanced features Firefox and Safari are the only contenders.
But how much of what is on your computer is original files owned only by you? A good backup service shouldn't require you to upload files it already has in it's database.
Even with several gigs of original content you probably aren't generating it in one day so it'd only have to backup the new stuff. Unless you're doing something like serious video editing or using a really crappy modem it probably wouldn't be much of an issue. I transfer a couple gig of files (upstream) over my DSL every day so a couple dozen megs shouldn't be to bad for most users.
Of course I'm biased since I've been working on creating a web-based backup service for a while now.;) When you use the website it automatically scans your computer and uploads new files (those whose hash isn't known) to the backup servers. With 100,000+ users I doubt much of the second-hand content you might have would be unknown to the server when you find it.
So plug serveral together.:) Anyone in their right mind doesn't do local backups anyway. That is what the Internet is for. Backup your data on a server a long long way away for less chance that a single event will kill all copies.
Have you tried SFU? It's really crappy. Troublesome to setup and use with major reliability problems. It's workable in a pinch but clearly designed to discourage using it. It just says "We have this feature but look how crappy it is compared to a pure Windows platform." all over it.
Slashdot Mirror
That's why we put their brains in little jars and throw away the bodies. Much more compact. Create a nice VR world and give all the brains WiFi access and you're set.
A prime example of very good books.
You know you don't have to just play Minesweeper. You could plug into the network or at least install some new programs from disc. Many of us think of Windows as the virus so I have doubts about your claims anyway. ;)
Or implement Slashdot like karma so users can moderate each other's comments. Works fairly well. A lot better than trying to have a single moderator.
I'd be more impressed if they could index every dirty picture on MySpace and copy them all out so you could look at them in some linear way without having to work through all that annoying crap about peoples lifes. Gee at least that'd be useful.
I guess I see this is a path for an Apple/Disney merger. I'm not quite sure what that'd mean but it'd seem to be a better fit than the AOL/Time Warner merge. Apple and Pixar represent technology as art which is what Disney really needs to reclaim it's soul. Apple could leverage the Disney name and content to really make a strong move in the digital media market. I think Disney still owns ABC too which would just be more content at their fingertips. It seems it could be a powerful money making combination.
You don't get a much better child friendly combination than Apple and Disney. It'd present a lot of opportunity in the edutainment market in the least.
Which is why you'd use a combination of the two. ;) Would seem the obvious solution.
Instead of a counter-weight you counter gravity with magnetics. The at rest position of the magnets should equal the weight of the car. Not to hard and less moving parts and less space needed.
True although I think it isn't very noticable if the transition is gradual rather than jerking. I'd think a maglev would offer much smoother transitions than a normal elevator as it's much easier to make smooth changes to electrical charges than to mechanical devices.
IE's poor CSS and lack of proper PNG support annoys me as to death. Impossible to do many things in IE and many others are much more labor to do in IE.
I have my own ZenWorks alternative. To be released to the public - someday. ;)
Good point. That is just bad design from the website.
I'd imagine the counterweight is replaced by magnets that give the car roughly an upward lift that matches the cars weight and possibly it's suggested load weight too. If I were going to design a maglev elevator I'd give it a tendacy to rise up when the power stops so that the car would tend towards rising and gravity would repulse that force. Rather than using the soft magnetic pull of the electro magnets to raise the car I'd use them to help it move down by counteracting the pull of the more fixed electro magnets. So if the power went out the car wouldn't tend to fall but rather it'd hover in place or slowly sink to the basement. I'd imagine they still have some sort of emergency braking system too.
The only thing on your list that really seems to be correct is slower and I'd imagine that is only in these early models. A maglev has the potential to move people much faster and be much simpler in design so probably easier to maintain, safer, and cheaper. It shouldn't use as much electricity as a normal elevator since friction should be reduced. It's all magnetics which means there is little in the way of parts to break and no need for counter-weights, pullies, etc. If the power dies I'd expect the car would just freeze in place or possibly slowly lower to the bottom floor.
In software terms two months is ancient. ;) Hell, forget to apply software patches daily and you're a security risk.
The 1.5 versions of Firefox and Thunderbird are self-updating. It seems to work pretty well so far. We'll see if there are issues the auto updates can't handle. Probably some bugs since it's a new feature but it's a really good idea I think. The apps and any installed extensions will be updated as needed unless you turn updates off.
I still think IE should just repackage Firefox as IE7. Easier, totally legal, and they can give users their expected look and feel with improved security, features, and standards support of FF. Seems a good idea to me at least.
For the most part Firefox installs it's own updates unless you're using some ancient version or somehow disable updating. ;)
You're IE fixes may be automated through your SUS server but you still have to wait for M$ to release the fixes which isn't usually as soon as you need the fixes.
I do wonder when Apple might consider releasing Safari for Windows, Linux, etc. Shouldn't be to hard as it's based on KHTML. It'd seem to be an area they could do well on and show off their tech.
One that really pisses me off is that on the government website I use to pay back my student loans it's impossible to logon with anything besides IE and they never say so. Their support line had no idea and the error message just says invalid password. It was only through trial and error that I figured it out at all. Lame. The government shouldn't be making websites that aren't standards complaint and accessible to all.
I haven't recently tried Konqueror but I do test in Safari (both use the KHTML engine I believe?) and usually there aren't many major bugs in Safari if it works in Firefox. Opera I've mostly given up supporting unless I just have spare time. I figure it's Opera's fault if they're not standard compliant and their market share doesn't justify much effort on my part. If you have a complaint I'd suggest yelling at Opera unless you can prove that the problem is because Firefox is breaking the standard.
If a site is standards compliant then it shouldn't have to worry about every browser out there. If the browsers can't render correctly then it is the maker of the browser who is in the wrong. Supporting IE is just a sad must because of it's ~75% market share - nobody else deserves special consideration.
You must not be a developer. IE is incredibly limiting in what you can do with your site designs and is annoyingly poorly standardized. Not only does it not follow a real standard it doesn't set it's own standard either as major changes happen between different versions of IE and are never fully documented. The IE standard is mostly whatever people can figure out by fighting to make things work in IE. So long as you're using plain HTML and don't mind rather ugly pages it's not a big deal but if you want nice looking pages and advanced features Firefox and Safari are the only contenders.
You can't access the files using NFS?
But how much of what is on your computer is original files owned only by you? A good backup service shouldn't require you to upload files it already has in it's database.
;) When you use the website it automatically scans your computer and uploads new files (those whose hash isn't known) to the backup servers. With 100,000+ users I doubt much of the second-hand content you might have would be unknown to the server when you find it.
Even with several gigs of original content you probably aren't generating it in one day so it'd only have to backup the new stuff. Unless you're doing something like serious video editing or using a really crappy modem it probably wouldn't be much of an issue. I transfer a couple gig of files (upstream) over my DSL every day so a couple dozen megs shouldn't be to bad for most users.
Of course I'm biased since I've been working on creating a web-based backup service for a while now.
So plug serveral together. :) Anyone in their right mind doesn't do local backups anyway. That is what the Internet is for. Backup your data on a server a long long way away for less chance that a single event will kill all copies.
Have you tried SFU? It's really crappy. Troublesome to setup and use with major reliability problems. It's workable in a pinch but clearly designed to discourage using it. It just says "We have this feature but look how crappy it is compared to a pure Windows platform." all over it.
Or run it behind a Linux box and use a caching filesystem in front of it. :)